We run OpenELIS Global 2 (v3.2.2.0) and have a requirement for a validation workflow where two people sign off on results in sequence, not in parallel:
- Lab Head does the first review — accept / reject / send for retest.
- Only after Lab Head accepts does it go to Unit Head for final approval/rejection/retest.
- Both need their own recorded signature and comments, and the report should show both sign-offs — Lab Head shouldn’t be able to finalize/release on their own.
Before we go design something custom, I wanted to check: is this a new requirement, or has this come up at other facilities/deployments before? Is a two-tier sequential sign-off (as opposed to just having multiple people who can validate) something others have needed or already built, or would we be the first to run into it?
Would appreciate any thoughts or prior experience — whether it’s “yes, common, here’s how we did it” or “no, this is unusual for our workflows.”
1 Like
sorry @Bhupesh_Gupta for the delay reply ,
Interesting use case. OpenELIS Global 2 currently supports a single validation step — results go from “Pending Validation” to “Validated” with one reviewer’s sign-off. There’s no built-in two-tier sequential validation workflow (Lab Head → Unit Head) out of the box.
That said, the validation system is role-based, so multiple users with validation permissions can review results, but it’s parallel (anyone with the role can validate), not sequential (one tier must approve before the next).
This would likely require a custom feature — adding a second validation status (e.g., “Pending Final Approval”) between “Validated” and “Released,” with role-based access control for each tier. The audit trail already records who validated and when, so extending it to capture two sign-offs should be feasible.
Would be good to hear from the maintainers (@pmanko, @samuelmale) whether this has been discussed before or if it’s on the roadmap. If not, a feature request on GitHub would be a good next step.
2 Likes
Thanks @Joseph_Kagimu .
This hasnt been discussed yet but it can be built in a generic way such that it can be configurable.
Hi,
Senaite/BIKA LIMS has this functionality where you can configure how many verifications are needed before results are released with an option to allow self verification (in case of urgent results)
@Bhupesh_Gupta does this functionality meet your use case and is it a feature we can borrow?
This isn’t about the same person verifying multiple times — in my case, the reviewers are different. The Unit Head does a high‑level check, mainly looking at out‑of‑range values, while the Lab Head goes through each value in detail.
Hi @Bhupesh_Gupta
My apologies, I was not clear, the functionality allows configuration of distinct approval steps and multiple verification types so that secondary reviewers or quality control heads can sign off independently before the results are published, with also an option to self verify in case of emergencies.
1 Like
Yes in that case it will meet our use case.
Hello @Moses_Mutesasira ,
Any plans to build it in near future?
cc @caseyi this looks a good feature to have
