Roche RIS Feedback Portal

Hi @Patrice Fayolle ,

Thank you for your feedback. I'll share it with the tech team and add this feature to our backlog for further evaluation.

Thanks again for taking the time to share your input.

Regards,
Mary

Hi @Maria Doretto,

Thanks for the update. For me the 1x1 limitation is acceptable. I assume that customers will use a bigger widget to have relevant information.

Thanks again for the work

Best regards

Hi @Patrice Fayolle,

Thanks again for the positive feedback on the first proposal, really glad the direction resonated.

As I moved forward with the design, I ran into a point I'd like to share with you and get your input on.

The logic I'm following
Since we don't have a dedicated icon for test masking, the idea is to keep visual consistency with the existing Instrument Masking widget by following this pattern:

• Upper part (status): masking icon

• Central part (element): test or instrument icon

So the widget reads as Status: Masked; Element: Test / Instrument. In the "no masked" state, the masking icon is replaced by the element icon (test or instrument), to reinforce the "all good" state while keeping context about what the widget refers to.

The open point
The ambiguity is mainly a concern for the 1×1 and 1×N widget sizes. In larger sizes, the content itself (masked units vs. masked tests, list of items, etc.) makes it immediately clear what the widget refers to. But at 1×1 / 1×N, the only differentiators are the widget name used by the client and content of the widget.

What I'd like your feedback on

• Does this approach feel clear and intuitive from a customer perspective?

• Is the ambiguity at 1×1 / 1×N an acceptable trade-off, or do you see it as a real usability issue?

I've attached the updated mockups showing both the "Masked" and "No masked" states for reference.

Thanks a lot for your help!
Best regards,
Maria

Hi @Maria Doretto

Well that's awsome. Really good job thank you

Hi @Patrice Fayolle,

Thank you for the clarification.

Based on what you explained, I'd like to share a first proposal for a Test Masking widget, conceived as a separate widget from Instrument Masking, specifically to give a quick visual indication of whether tests are masked on an instrument. The widget is clickable, and via a popup it would be possible to see which tests are masked and for what reason.

At this stage, I’d mainly like to understand whether this level of detail is useful from your perspective, and if anything is missing (for example: timestamp, sorting, or other key attributes).

Regarding module masking: at the moment we don’t track module-level data, so this is not something we can display.

Thanks again for your feedback, it’s very helpful at this early stage.

Best regards,
Maria

Hi @Marie Doretto

Thank you for taking into account my suggestion about this new widget.

Regarding Test masking :

What is really important to my point of view is to know is the whole instrument is masked or only some tests. And the main information needed is the number of tests in this case. Because navify monitoring is a visual tool.

I'm not sure that having the detail of masked test is relevant because they have this information on nLO.

What is really important is when a customer start its roche solution, just to be sure that on instruments everything is ready or not.

Regarding module masking

For me a yes or no is sufficient.

Best regards,

Patrice

Hi @Patrice Fayolle

Thank you for your valuable feedback regarding the new instrument masking widget! It's excellent to hear that the introduction of instrument masking has been a success and is proving very helpful to your teams.

We agree that expanding the widget's scope to provide more comprehensive masking visibility is a logical and necessary next step for completeness.

To ensure we prioritize and design the right enhancements for you, we need a little more detail about the desired view:

Regarding Test Masking:

• What level of detail do you need to see within the widget? Is it sufficient to show a count of how many tests are currently masked (e.g., "5 masked tests")?

• Or do you require the ability to see the specific names/identifiers of which tests have been masked (e.g., a list of "Test A, Test C, Test G")? And why is this specific detail important for your workflow?

Regarding Module Masking:

Module masking is a great addition, but it presents a technical challenge as we do not currently track this data within the system.

• For module masking, would a simple indicator be enough (e.g., "Modules Masked: Yes/No"), or do you require visibility into which specific modules are masked?

Your input on these details will help us design a solution that provides maximum utility without cluttering the interface.

Thank you again for helping us improve the product. We look forward to your response.

Best regards,
Mary