Back to work

Registry Data Integrity

Improving record integrity through consistent validation, edit handling, and soft-delete-aware logic.

Internship projectData integrityFastAPI / MySQL / Vue

Overview

This project focuses on record integrity in the BCTP registry system. Its core concerns are medical-record-number uniqueness, excluding the current record when validating an edit, and consistency around soft deletion. The technology context is FastAPI, MySQL, and Vue.

The work sits at the meeting point of an interface rule and the data it protects. A uniqueness check has to mean the same thing when information is entered, edited, or evaluated alongside records with different deletion states.

My contribution

My contribution addresses those validation and consistency concerns across the frontend and backend. The focus is on record-number handling, recognizing the record currently being edited, and accounting for soft-deleted records. Connecting these checks helps express a single rule across the parts of the system involved in saving a change.

At a glance / Illustrative diagram
  1. Propose a change
  2. Identify the current record
  3. Check uniqueness & deletion state
  4. Return validation

Validation flow

The workflow begins with a proposed change, identifies the edit context, applies the relevant uniqueness and deletion-state rules, and returns a validation result. The diagram separates those concerns so that the identity of the edited record and the status of other records remain visible parts of the reasoning.

Engineering focus

An edit should not treat the current record as its own duplicate. Soft deletion adds a separate question about which records participate in the uniqueness rule. The engineering concern is to keep these interpretations aligned wherever the rule is applied, so interface feedback and backend validation do not describe different requirements.

Status & scope

This internship contribution focuses on validation and data consistency within an existing registry. The example is limited to those rules and uses an illustrative workflow; it does not represent a complete system audit or production acceptance assessment.