Skip to content

Phase 2 — Conceptual Design Explanation

This section explains the design rationale behind the Enhanced Entity-Relationship (EER) model.

The objective of the conceptual design is to model the problem domain accurately while ensuring clarity, flexibility, scalability, and consistency with real-world constraints.

EER Diagram Phase 3 — Logical Design


1. Design Approach

The EER model was developed using a top-down design approach, beginning with application requirements and identifying the core entities necessary to support system functionality.

The design prioritizes:

  • Clear separation of responsibilities between entities
  • Minimization of data redundancy
  • Logical grouping of related information
  • Enforced ownership and participation constraints
  • Support for future system extensions

The model focuses strictly on conceptual structure and excludes implementation details such as SQL constraints or indexing strategies.


2. Entity Design Rationale


2.1 User

The User entity represents registered system users who interact with the application.

It:

  • Stores identifying and contact information
  • Acts as the root entity for managed data
  • Owns multiple family members

This reflects realistic family health management scenarios.


2.2 FamilyMember

The FamilyMember entity represents individuals associated with a user.

Separating this entity from User allows:

  • Representation of multiple relatives per user
  • Tracking hereditary medical patterns
  • Avoidance of duplication of user-level data

Each family member is owned by exactly one user.


2.3 MedicalHistory

The MedicalHistory entity stores historical medical records for family members.

It supports:

  • Multiple records per family member
  • Temporal tracking of medical conditions
  • Flexible expansion for additional health attributes

This separation ensures normalized storage of health-related data.


2.4 HealthCondition

The HealthCondition entity standardizes disease and condition definitions.

This prevents repetition of condition names across medical records and enables:

  • Consistent referencing
  • Easier updates to condition metadata
  • Support for analytics and pattern detection

2.5 RiskAlert

The RiskAlert entity represents automatically generated alerts based on detected hereditary or medical patterns.

It is modeled independently to support:

  • Alert lifecycle management (active, resolved)
  • Historical alert tracking
  • Future analytical extensions

Alerts remain stored after resolution to preserve audit history.


2.6 Appointment and Clinic

Appointments are modeled independently and linked to clinics to reflect realistic scheduling workflows.

This design allows:

  • Multiple appointments per user
  • Centralized clinic information
  • Flexibility for supporting different clinic types

Each appointment must be associated with both a user and a clinic.


2.7 AwarenessContent

The AwarenessContent entity stores educational materials and preventive information.

It is intentionally independent from medical records to ensure:

  • Modular content management
  • Easy updates without affecting medical data
  • Access by users without ownership dependency

3. Keys and Attribute Design

Primary keys uniquely identify each entity:

Entity Primary Key Notes
User UserID Root entity for managed data
FamilyMember FamilyMemberID References User
MedicalHistory MedicalHistoryID References FamilyMember and HealthCondition
HealthCondition ConditionID Standardized condition registry
Appointment AppointmentID References User and Clinic
Clinic ClinicID Centralized clinic registry
RiskAlert AlertID Tracks generated alerts

Some attributes are derived, such as Age (calculated from DateOfBirth), and are not stored directly unless required for performance optimization.


4. Cardinality and Participation Constraints

The conceptual model enforces realistic structural constraints:

User → FamilyMember (1 : N)

  • Each family member must belong to exactly one user
  • Total participation on FamilyMember

FamilyMember → MedicalHistory (1 : N)

  • Each medical history record must belong to exactly one family member
  • Total participation on MedicalHistory

MedicalHistory → HealthCondition (N : 1)

  • Each medical history record references exactly one health condition

User → Appointment (1 : N)

  • Each appointment must be scheduled by exactly one user

Appointment → Clinic (N : 1)

  • Each appointment must occur at exactly one clinic

These participation constraints prevent orphan records and preserve ownership consistency.


5. Design Assumptions

The conceptual model is based on the following assumptions:

  • A FamilyMember cannot exist without a managing User
  • A MedicalHistory record requires both a FamilyMember and a HealthCondition
  • A RiskAlert is preserved after resolution for audit and analytical purposes
  • AwarenessContent is independent of user ownership

6. Transition to Logical Design

The conceptual model established in Phase 2 provides the foundation for:

  • Mapping entities into relational tables
  • Defining primary and foreign keys
  • Applying normalization rules
  • Enforcing integrity constraints

These tasks will be completed in Phase 3 — Logical Design.