Improve differential presentation search UX

[BigSimmo]

Summary

• Use the standard global header on differential presentation pages and remove the redundant globe control.
• Distinguish Presentation and Differential results with explicit badges, improve mobile result-card hierarchy, and place indexed-source status above Safety first.
• Replace slash-heavy presentation labels with 22 canonical display titles while retaining the original titles as searchable aliases.
• Keep the lightweight cross-mode index aligned with live presentation subtitles, preserve legacy-title matching, and make catalogue status copy failure/empty-state aware.

Verification

• npm run verify:pr-local
  • Not rerun for PR opening; focused verification from implementation was reused to avoid duplicating GitHub coverage.
• npm run verify:ui
  • Full UI gate not rerun. Relevant evidence: 94/94 Differential tools browser tests, 10/10 focused phone/PWA checks, and all four targeted result/header journeys passed.
• npm run verify:release
  • Not run; release confidence was not requested.
• npm test -- tests/differentials.test.ts — 32/32 passed.
• npm run typecheck — passed.
• npm run check:cross-mode-index — current at the repaired head.
• Cross-mode index and design-system contract checks — passed.
• Changed-file Prettier formatting — passed unchanged.
• npm run check:production-readiness
  • Environment-gated in the isolated worktree because Supabase and OpenAI keys were unavailable; Node and query-hash boot guards passed.
• Phone-chrome gate was partial: all relevant Differential/header journeys passed; an unrelated calculator accessibility-matrix case exceeded its 50-second budget before the remaining broad suite was stopped.

Risk and rollout

• Risk: Low-to-moderate UI/search presentation change. Search discoverability changed to preserve legacy presentation-title matches; diagnostic content, emergency classifications, RAG retrieval, and generation are unchanged.
• Rollback: Revert the differential presentation search commits.
• Provider or production effects: None. No live provider calls, database migration, deployment, or hosted configuration changes.
• RAG impact: none; this PR does not touch RAG retrieval, generation, or citation behavior.
• Deployment classification/TGA SaMD review: no classification change identified for this display/search terminology change.

Clinical Governance Preflight

• Source-backed claims still require linked source verification before clinical use
• No patient-identifiable document workflow was introduced or expanded without explicit governance approval
• Supabase target remains Clinical KB Database (sjrfecxgysukkwxsowpy)
• Service-role keys and private document access remain server-only
• Demo/synthetic content remains clearly separated from real clinical sources
• Source metadata, review status, and outdated/unknown-source behavior remain conservative
• Deployment classification/TGA SaMD impact was checked when clinical decision-support behavior changed

Notes

• Physical iPhone Safari and installed-PWA acceptance remain unverified.
• Broad hosted CI is authoritative for the pushed repair; local focused Vitest execution was blocked by the repository's active-test lease and was not bypassed.

[coderabbitai]

Warning

Review limit reached

You’ve reached a temporary PR review limit under our Fair Usage Limits Policy.

Your current included review allowance is based on your included PR review attempts over the past 7 days.

Next review available in: 10 minutes

Limit details: You’ve used the included review currently available. Your 90 included PR review attempts over the past 7 days set your current allowance at 1 review per hour.

Your organization has reached its usage spending cap. Adjust your spending cap in the billing tab.

How can I continue?

Wait for the limit to reset, then comment @coderabbitai review or push new commits to the PR.

An organization admin can change what happens after included review limits in Billing.

How do review limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits within each organization.

For paid Pro and Pro+ reviews, CodeRabbit uses a developer's included PR review attempts over the past 7 days to set the current hourly allowance. At typical activity levels, the full plan allowance applies. Higher sustained activity can lower the allowance until earlier attempts leave the 7-day window.

Please refer docs for additional details.

Review details

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 99f48835-3cd3-4ea2-b8b4-2389a1f5faad

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 9a382a0 and ec75080.

📒 Files selected for processing (24)

• scripts/build-cross-mode-differentials-index.mjs
• src/components/clinical-dashboard/differentials-home.tsx
• src/components/clinical-dashboard/global-search-shell.tsx
• src/components/clinical-dashboard/master-search-header.tsx
• src/components/differentials/differential-presentation-workflow-page.tsx
• src/data/cross-mode-differentials-index.json
• src/data/differential-presentation-display-metadata.json
• src/lib/cross-mode-links.ts
• src/lib/differential-fixtures.ts
• src/lib/differential-presentation-display.ts
• src/lib/differential-records.ts
• src/lib/differential-search-composition.ts
• src/lib/differential-snapshot.ts
• src/lib/differential-stream.ts
• src/lib/differentials.ts
• tests/audit-navigation-auth-regressions.test.ts
• tests/cross-mode-differentials-index.test.ts
• tests/cross-mode-links.test.ts
• tests/differentials-compare-selection.dom.test.tsx
• tests/differentials.test.ts
• tests/ui-accessibility.spec.ts
• tests/ui-smoke.spec.ts
• tests/ui-tools.spec.ts
• tests/ui-universal-search.spec.ts

---

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

[supabase]

This pull request has been ignored for the connected project sjrfecxgysukkwxsowpy because there are no changes detected in supabase directory. You can change this behaviour in Project Integrations Settings ↗︎.

---

Preview Branches by Supabase.
Learn more about Supabase Branching ↗︎.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 73af50dd15

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[BigSimmo]

@codex resolve actionable Codex review findings for this pull request and current head using the repository instructions. This is the pull request's single automatic repair pass: do not perform a fresh review, create new standalone findings, or request another review. Work only the existing unresolved Codex threads on the current head. The only repository destination is BigSimmo/Database, and the only branch destination is the pull request head branch codex/differential-presentation-redesign-20260822 at starting commit 73af50d; never publish fixes to a detached or synthetic work branch and never create a stacked pull request. Use the authenticated GitHub connector to commit each approved fix to BigSimmo/Database:codex/differential-presentation-redesign-20260822, then verify that the pull request head contains the published commit before reporting success. Always fix P0 and P1 findings. For P2 and lower findings, fix only clear, scoped, low-risk issues; otherwise disposition them with a concise reason. For a fixed thread, reply with as the first line and as the second line. For a no-code disposition, use followed by . These result markers authorize the workflow to close that exact thread only after it verifies a fixed commit is the pull request head; a local-only commit is not a fix. If publication or verification fails, do not use either result marker, do not claim success, and leave the thread open with the blocker. If human input or new authorization is required, do the same. Finish only after every actionable thread is fixed or dispositioned and closed, or explicitly left open for a human decision. Do not update the branch from main, address unrelated reviews, broaden scope, or create more than one scoped fix commit. Do not use external APIs, paid services, credentials, dependency changes, or broad refactors unless explicitly authorized. Add targeted tests where behavior changes and run the narrowest relevant validation.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Already looking forward to the next diff.

Reviewed commit: 73af50dd15

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[github-actions]

CI triage

CI failed on this PR. Automated classification of the 2 failed job(s):

• Production UI (1) — not baselined: this job did NOT run on the main comparison below (path-scoped skip), so that run says nothing about it either way. Treat the comparison as absent, not green, and inspect the failing step.
• PR required — needs investigation: inspect the failing step and uploaded diagnostics; rerun only after classifying the cause.

Compared with main CI run #13248 (success). That run's conclusion is an aggregate and did not exercise Production UI (1).

Classification is evidence routing, not permission to ignore a failure. Exact quarantined Playwright identities remain governed by the flake ledger.