[Uganda Project - Technoforte Team] Informant name missing on Review page when record moves between user roles (mutually exclusive NAME fields)

[Abhay-Dev-Gautam]

Issue: Informant name missing on Review page when record moves between user roles (mutually exclusive NAME fields)

Summary

When the Informant/Notifier name is captured using two mutually exclusive NAME fields (one auto-populated based on user role, one manually entered), the name appears correctly for the initial user role but becomes empty on the Review page when the record is accessed by a user with a different role.

This occurs even though the name was previously populated and visible in earlier steps of the workflow.

---

Context

On the Notifier (Informant) details page, two NAME fields are defined:

• informant.name

  • Manually entered
  • Shown when the user is not a HEALTH_FACILITY_ADMINISTRATOR

• informant.autoName

  • Auto-populated from the logged-in user’s profile
  • Shown only when the user has the HEALTH_FACILITY_ADMINISTRATOR role

These two fields are mutually exclusive using ConditionalType.SHOW.

---

Current Behaviour

Behaviour observed across roles

1. A user with role HEALTH_FACILITY_ADMINISTRATOR:

   • Sees informant.autoName
   • Name is auto-populated from user profile
   • Name displays correctly on:
     • Notifier page
     • Review page
   • Record is sent for registration

2. A user with role Registration Officer opens the same record:

   • informant.autoName is now hidden due to role-based conditionals
   • informant.name becomes visible instead
   • informant.name has no stored value
   • Result: Informant name appears empty on the Review page

The name that was previously captured under informant.autoName is not displayed once that field is hidden.

---

Relevant configuration (mutually exclusive NAME fields)

connectToMOSIPIdReader(
  {
    id: 'informant.name',
    type: FieldType.NAME,
    required: true,
    configuration: {
      maxLength: MAX_NAME_LENGTH,
      name: {
        surname: {
          required: true,
          label: {
            defaultMessage: 'Last name',
            description: 'Label for family name text input',
            id: 'form.field.label.familyName'
          }
        },
        firstname: {
          required: true,
          label: {
            defaultMessage: 'First name(s)',
            description: 'Label for form field: First names',
            id: 'form.field.label.firstNames'
          }
        },
        middlename: {
          required: false,
          label: {
            defaultMessage: 'Middle name',
            description: 'Label for middle name text input',
            id: 'form.field.label.middleName'
          }
        }
      },
      order: ['surname', 'firstname', 'middlename']
    },
    hideLabel: true,
    label: {
      defaultMessage: 'Full name',
      description: 'This is the label for the field',
      id: 'form.preview.group.label.english.name'
    },
    conditionals: [
      {
        type: ConditionalType.SHOW,
        conditional: and(
          informantOtherThanParent,
          not(shouldAutoPopulateUserData)
        )
      }
    ],
    parent: field('informant.relation'),
    validation: [invalidNameValidator('informant.name')]
  },
  {
    valuePath: 'data.name',
    disableIf: ['pending', 'verified', 'authenticated']
  }
)

{
  id: 'informant.autoName',
  type: FieldType.NAME,
  required: true,
  defaultValue: {
    firstname: user('firstname'),
    middlename: user('middlename'),
    surname: user('surname')
  },
  configuration: {
    maxLength: MAX_NAME_LENGTH,
    name: {
      surname: {
        required: true,
        label: {
          defaultMessage: 'Last name',
          description: 'Label for family name text input',
          id: 'form.field.label.familyName'
        }
      },
      firstname: {
        required: true,
        label: {
          defaultMessage: 'First name(s)',
          description: 'Label for form field: First names',
          id: 'form.field.label.firstNames'
        }
      },
      middlename: {
        required: false,
        label: {
          defaultMessage: 'Middle name',
          description: 'Label for middle name text input',
          id: 'form.field.label.middleName'
        }
      }
    },
    order: ['surname', 'firstname', 'middlename']
  },
  hideLabel: true,
  label: {
    defaultMessage: 'Full name',
    description: 'This is the label for the field',
    id: 'form.preview.group.label.english.name'
  },
  conditionals: [
    {
      type: ConditionalType.SHOW,
      conditional: and(informantOtherThanParent, shouldAutoPopulateUserData)
    }
  ],
  parent: field('informant.relation'),
  validation: [invalidNameValidator('informant.autoName')]
}

---

Expected Behaviour

If the Informant name has already been captured (auto-populated or manual):

• The name should continue to appear consistently on the Review page
• The displayed name should not depend on:
  • Which mutually exclusive field is currently visible
  • The role of the user viewing the record

---

Why this is a problem

• The record loses visible critical data when transitioning between roles
• Reviewers may assume the Informant name was never provided
• This is especially problematic in multi-role workflows where:
  • One role auto-populates data
  • Another role reviews or registers the record

---

Screenshots

Review page – Health Facility Administrator

(Name visible, auto-populated)

---

Review page – Registration Officer

(Name missing / empty)

---

Environment

• OpenCRVS Version: <V1.9.7>
• Country Configuration: Uganda
• Event Type: Birth
• Page: Notifier (Informant) details → Review
• User Roles Involved:
  • HEALTH_FACILITY_ADMINISTRATOR
  • Registration Officer

[euanmillar]

@Abhay-Dev-Gautam you need to creatively use and/or conditionals using helpers such as the event status and the various ActionTypes relevant to the user at a given moment...

e.g. in your Registration Officer name field ...

{
        id: 'informant.name',
        ...
        conditionals: [
          {
            type: ConditionalType.SHOW,
            conditional: and(
              informantOtherThanParent,
              not(shouldAutoPopulateUserData),
              not(
                field('child.placeOfBirth').isEqualTo(
                  PlaceOfBirth.HEALTH_FACILITY
                )
              ),
              event.hasAction(ActionType.CREATE) // will only show to a Registration Officer when they themselves are creating a declaration
            )
          }
        ],

For the HEALTH_FACILITY_ADMINISTRATOR who in your case has DECLARE scope, configure like this:

{
      id: 'informant.autoName',
      ...
      conditionals: [
        {
          type: ConditionalType.SHOW,
          conditional: 
          or(
            and(informantOtherThanParent, shouldAutoPopulateUserData), // The first time the health facility user uses the form
            and(
              field('child.placeOfBirth').isEqualTo(
                PlaceOfBirth.HEALTH_FACILITY
              ),
              event.hasAction(ActionType.DECLARE) // The case where another user of a different role views the declaration
            )
          )
        }
      ],

[Abhay-Dev-Gautam]

@euanmillar Thanks for the suggestion — using event.hasAction(...) in the conditionals resolved the original issue. The Informant name now correctly appears on the Review page when a Health Facility Administrator (HFA) declares an event and a Registration Officer (RO) later opens it for registration.

However, I’ve encountered an additional scenario.

Scenario

A Registration Officer (RO) can also create a Birth declaration for a Health Facility.

In this case:

• The RO does not have the HEALTH_FACILITY_ADMINISTRATOR role.
• Auto-population should not occur.
• A manual NAME field should be visible so the RO can enter the Informant name.

With the current conditional setup:

• informant.autoName is hidden (correctly, since RO is not HFA)
• informant.name is also hidden due to the health facility + action-based constraints
• Result: No NAME field is visible in the UI

So while the cross-role Review issue is resolved, this new case results in neither field being rendered when an RO creates a Health Facility birth.

Could you advise how the conditionals should be structured to support this scenario without reintroducing the original Review issue?