Pegasystems PEGACPLSA88V1 Exam - Topic 7 Question 39 Discussion

Actual exam question for Pegasystems's PEGACPLSA88V1 exam

Question #: 39
Topic #: 7

A health plan application includes a process for surgical procedure requests. Currently, there is an evaluation subprocess in which a physician reviews the diagnosis and enters the recommended procedure and its urgency. The request then advances to a medical director who analyzes the feedback and approves the appropriate procedure. The health care organization has created a new requirement, which states that three physicians can perform the evaluation independently. Only two evaluations are necessary to advance the case to the medical director.

In order to allow the three physicians to review the orders in parallel, how would you configure the process?

AAdd a Split Join shape, add a list of physicians, and call the surgical procedure request process.

BAdd a Split For Each shape, add a list of physicians, and call the evaluation process.

CAdd a Split Join shape, add a list of physicians, and call the evaluation process.

DAdd a cascading approvals shape that is called by the evaluation subprocess.

Show Suggested Answer

Suggested Answer: B

To allow three physicians to review the orders in parallel, you need to use the 'Split For Each' shape. This shape enables parallel processing for each item in a list, such as the list of physicians.

Understanding Split For Each Shape in Pega: The 'Split For Each' shape allows you to create instances of a subprocess for each item in a specified list. This means each physician can independently review and evaluate the surgical procedure requests simultaneously.

Configuration Steps:

Step 1: Create a list of physicians who will be performing the evaluations.

Step 2: Add a 'Split For Each' shape to the process flow.

Step 3: Configure the 'Split For Each' shape to iterate over the list of physicians.

Step 4: Define the evaluation subprocess to be called for each physician.

Step 5: Ensure that each physician's evaluation subprocess is independent of the others.

Advantages of Using Split For Each: This approach allows all three physicians to perform their evaluations simultaneously, reducing the overall processing time and ensuring that the process can advance as soon as two out of three evaluations are completed.

Reference: Pega Documentation on Split For Each shape provides detailed steps on how to configure and use this shape in your process flows.

by Carmen at Aug 02, 2025, 02:45 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium PEGACPLSA88V1 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel

Yuriko

2 months ago

I’m leaning towards D, but not sure how cascading approvals would work here.

upvoted 0 times

...

Rosina

2 months ago

Definitely going with A, it allows for flexibility with the physician list.

upvoted 0 times

...

Christiane

2 months ago

Wait, only two evaluations needed? That feels risky!

upvoted 0 times

...

Madalyn

3 months ago

I disagree, C seems more efficient with the Split Join.

upvoted 0 times

...

Ashleigh

3 months ago

I think option B makes the most sense for parallel evaluations.

upvoted 0 times

...

Idella

3 months ago

I don't think a cascading approvals shape is what we need here, since we want the evaluations to happen in parallel, not sequentially.

upvoted 0 times

...

Annice

4 months ago

I'm a bit confused about whether to use a Split Join or a Split For Each. I feel like both could work, but I can't recall the specific differences in how they handle parallel tasks.

upvoted 0 times

...

Carline

4 months ago

I remember practicing a question similar to this, and I think a Split For Each shape could be the right choice to handle the evaluations independently.

upvoted 0 times

...

Tony

4 months ago

I think we might need to use a Split Join shape since it allows multiple evaluations to happen simultaneously, but I'm not entirely sure if that's the best option.

upvoted 0 times

...

Desmond

4 months ago

I like the idea of the cascading approvals shape in option D. That could help streamline the process and ensure the appropriate level of review. I'll need to think through how that would integrate with the evaluation subprocess though.

upvoted 0 times

...

Vi

4 months ago

Hmm, the requirement states that only two evaluations are necessary to advance the case. So I'm wondering if option C with the Split Join shape might be a better fit, since it would allow the process to move forward as soon as two evaluations are complete.

upvoted 0 times

...

Lorean

4 months ago

I'm a bit confused on the difference between the Split Join and Split For Each shapes. I'll need to review the documentation on those to make sure I understand which one is more appropriate for this scenario.

upvoted 0 times

...

Leontine

5 months ago

This seems like a straightforward process automation problem. I think option B is the way to go - using a Split For Each shape to call the evaluation process in parallel for the three physicians.

upvoted 0 times

...

Deeanna

5 months ago

I'd go with option C. The Split Join shape looks like it would allow the three physicians to review the orders in parallel, which is what the requirement is asking for.

upvoted 0 times

...

Ettie

5 months ago

Option B makes the most sense to me. Splitting the evaluation process and calling it for each physician seems like the best way to get the independent reviews done.

upvoted 0 times