MET CS 669: Health Database Design and Implementation Assignment

This assignment for MET CS 669 focuses on the design and implementation of health databases. The assignment is divided into two parts. Part 1 involves analyzing business rules related to physicians and patients, including diagnoses and their codes, and creating an entity-relationship diagram (ERD) using Crow’s Foot notation to represent the relationships between these entities. Part 2 extends this analysis to a pediatrician clinic scenario, involving children, responsible adults, appointments, and bills. Students are required to identify entities, define relationships, specify optionality and plurality constraints, create a complete list of business rules, and develop an ERD for this more complex scenario. The assignment emphasizes understanding of database design principles, business rule analysis, and the ability to translate these concepts into a visual representation using ERDs. The grading rubric evaluates the content's understanding and the clarity of the presentation.

MET CS 669 Database Design and Implementation for Business
Health Assignment 2
The two parts in this assignment will contribute equally to your grade and will be
evaluated separately.
Part 1: Physicians and Patients
Review the following business rules regarding physicians and patients to complete this
part.
 A diagnosis is given to one or more patients.
 A patient is given one or more diagnoses.
 An attending physician sees at least 20 patients.
 Each diagnosis is given a diagnosis code.
The business rules above specify all of the relevant entities; however, some business
rules do not specify both sides of the relationship. You will be completing this list of
business rules.
1. To get started, list the names of all entities provided in the business rules above.
2. Identify the entities that are related to each other.
3. Identify the optionality and plurality constraints on both sides of each relationship,
where possible. Indicate where the provided business rules do not provide the
optionality and plurality constraints.
4. Create a complete list of business rules. The new list should not add additional
entities, but should specify the optionality and plurality constraints for both sides of all
relationships. Make reasonable assumptions to create the list and state your
assumptions. There is no provably “right” list of assumptions.
5. Create a conceptual entity-relationship diagram using Crow’s Foot notation that
reflects your list of business rules. You may use Microsoft Visio Pro or another similarly
capable drawing application to produce your ERD. Note that cardinalities are not
required in the diagram, though relationship connectivities are required.
Copyright 2011-2013 Boston University. All Rights Reserved.

Part 2: Pediatricians and Children
In this part, you will be repeating the same steps in Part 1 for a more complex
pediatrician clinic scenario. Review the following business rules then complete the steps
indicated below.
 Every child has a responsible adult.
 Responsible adults have one or more children.
 A child may have multiple appointments with multiple pediatricians in the clinic.
 One pediatrician attends each appointment.
 Each appointment results in a bill for the responsible adult.
1. List the names of all entities provided in the business rules above.
2. Identify the entities that are related to each other.
3. Identify the optionality and plurality constraints on both sides of each relationship,
where possible. Indicate where the provided business rules do not provide the
optionality and plurality constraints.
4. Create a complete list of business rules. The new list should not add additional
entities, but should specify the optionality and plurality constraints for both sides of all
relationships. Make reasonable assumptions to create the list and state your
assumptions. There is no provably “right” list of assumptions.
5. Create a conceptual entity-relationship diagram using Crow’s Foot notation that
reflects your list of business rules. Note that cardinalities are not required in the
diagram, though relationship connectivities are required.
Use the Ask the Facilitators Discussion Forum if you have any questions
regarding the how to approach this assignment.
Save your assignment as lastnameFirstname_assign2_health.doc and submit
it in the Assignments section of the course.
For help uploading files please refer to the Technical Support page in the
syllabus.

Your submission will be evaluated according to the following grading rubric.
Grade Qualities Demonstrated by the Assignment Submission Grade
Assigned
Content (70%)
Measures the
quality of the
content in the
assignment
A+  100
The content demonstrates exceptional understanding of all relevant subject matter and its inter-
relationships. All major relevant issues are thoroughly covered, and all content is very focused
and on-topic. There is no known way to improve the content, and there are absolutely no
technical or coverage errors present.
A  96
The content demonstrates exceptional understanding of all relevant subject matter and its inter-
relationships. All major relevant issues are thoroughly covered, and all content is very focused
and on-topic. At most one insignificant technical or coverage error may be present
A-  92 The content demonstrates deep understanding of all relevant subject matter and its inter-
relationships. All major relevant issues are covered, and all content is on-topic.
B+  88 The content demonstrates understanding of all relevant subject matter and its inter-relationships.
Almost all major relevant issues are covered, and the content is at least reasonably on-topic.
B  85
The content demonstrates understanding of most relevant subject matter and its inter-
relationships. Almost all major relevant issues are covered, and all content is at least reasonably
on-topic.
B-  82
The content demonstrates moderate understanding of much relevant subject matter and its inter-
relationships. There is reasonable coverage of major relevant issues, and the content is at least
reasonably on-topic.
C+  78 The content demonstrates some understanding of relevant subject matter and its inter-
relationships. Some major relevant issues are covered, and at least some content is on-topic.
C  75
The content demonstrates understanding of a small portion of the relevant subject matter and its
inter-relationships. Some major relevant issues are covered, and at least a small portion of the
content is on-topic.
C-  72
The content demonstrates little understanding of and insight into the relevant subject matter and
its inter-relationships. A small portion of the major relevant issues are covered. The focus of the
content may be off topic or on insubstantial or secondary topics
D  67
The content demonstrates almost no understanding of or insight into the relevant subject matter
and its inter-relationships. Almost none of the major relevant issues are covered, and the content
may be almost entirely off-topic.
F  0 The content demonstrates no understanding of or insight into the relevant subject matter and its
inter-relationships. No major relevant issues are covered, and the content is entirely off-topic.
Exposition
(30%)
Measures how
well the content
is expressed
A+  100
The presentation of all ideas and designs is exceptionally clear and persuasive; the entire
submission is exceptionally organized. There is no known way to improve the clarity or
organization of the submission.
A  96
The presentation of all ideas and designs is exceptionally clear and persuasive; the entire
submission is exceptionally organized. There may be at most one insignificant way to improve
the clarity or organization of the submission.
A-  92 The presentation of all ideas and designs is very clear and persuasive; the entire submission is
very organized.
B+  88 The presentation of all ideas and designs is clear and persuasive; the entire submission is
organized.
B  85 The presentation of most ideas and designs is clear and persuasive; most of the submission is
organized.
B-  82 The presentation of most ideas and designs is generally clear; most of the submission is
reasonably organized.
C+  78 Some parts of the submission are hard to understand; some parts are disorganized.
C  75 About half of the submission is hard to understand; about half is disorganized.
C-  72 Most parts of the submission are hard to understand; most parts are disorganized.
D  67 Almost all of the submission is hard to understand and disorganized.
F  0 The entire submission is hard to understand and disorganized.