Venue : AVON Foundation Comprehensive Breast Evaluation Center

1. We introduced ourselves to Lesley Wojcik and team at Avon Medical center.
2. The discussion was concentrated about learning the project requirements.
3. Each of us drew the rough sketch of the how a simple front end would look like.
4. Each of us presented a different idea.
5. We decided to come with a simple utility, which will simulate the search.
6. We decided to look/study for already available utility programs in Windows operating system.
7. Lesley agreed to show team their current data management system in the next meeting.

Comments:

1. The client’s ideas/suggestions are to some extent clear, to some extent confusing, and to some extent beyond the reach.
2. Currently the client has tremendous resources, which are not utilized, as it was difficult to search their existing resources.
3. The client has several users, where each user has a collection of resources. Each user has his/her mechanism for organizing his/her resources. There is no unified approach for organizing the resources for the users.
4. The meeting aimed at developing bridging structures that can link all the available resources, and to develop search engines with different search criteria that can crawl through all the resources, and get the relevant resources from the search.
5. The various resources the client has include electronic data, research paper publications, journals, films etc.
6. The client suggested that Term Synthesis and barcode approach has to be followed to organize and search the data. The search engine should be powered with various search criteria for e.g., search based on topic, last name of the author, budget number, chronology of the resources.
7. The search engine designed should search online resources (PubMed, MedLine etc), in addition to searching the client’s own resources.
8. The design of the project should be based on the levels of abstraction of data.
9. The client uses Paradox (DOS based database, which is ODBC and SQL compliant), Turbo Library e-journals to search the resources.
10. Options should be provided for saving some of the searches, and an automatic naming convention has to be provided for the saved searches.
11. The client suggested that granularity in the searches should not be provided as it may sometimes lead to the loss of valuable information.
12. The conclusion of this meeting was the client requires that the data should be indexed and should support both refined and generalized search. The client expects "Perspective Indexing of data with Retrospective searching of Data".