| Issue Number | 3122 |
|---|---|
| Summary | [CTgov] Provide more feedback on CTGov Review page |
| Created | 2010-04-08 10:05:02 |
| Issue Type | Improvement |
| Submitted By | Osei-Poku, William (NIH/NCI) [C] |
| Assigned To | Kline, Bob (NIH/NCI) [C] |
| Status | Closed |
| Resolved | 2010-04-14 12:00:46 |
| Resolution | Fixed |
| Path | /home/bkline/backups/jira/ocecdr/issue.107450 |
BZISSUE::4798
BZDATETIME::2010-04-08 10:05:02
BZCREATOR::William Osei-Poku
BZASSIGNEE::Bob Kline
BZQACONTACT::William Osei-Poku
Since yesterday, when new CTGov documents are imported and changes applied, we get an "an error has occurred” message. This message continues to display in the page when you click the link to go to the review page.
BZDATETIME::2010-04-08 11:00:30
BZCOMMENTOR::Bob Kline
BZCOMMENT::1
This just means there are no records with the status 'not yet reviewed' to look at.
BZDATETIME::2010-04-08 11:06:58
BZCOMMENTOR::William Osei-Poku
BZCOMMENT::2
(In reply to comment #1)
> This just means there are no records with the status 'not yet
reviewed' to look
> at.
This error is different from the not yet reviewed feedback. This appears to be a general CDR web interface error because we are also getting this same error when we click on glossary links in QC reports of protocols. It does not retrieve the QC report of the target.
This is on both Bach and Franck.
(I will modify the title when the problem is identified).
BZDATETIME::2010-04-09 12:52:36
BZCOMMENTOR::William Osei-Poku
BZCOMMENT::3
At yesterday's meeting a decision was made to change the feedback users get when all documents have been reviewed and submitted. Currently, we received "No documents awaiting review". For example: A feedback of "The trials have successfully been imported" or " The trials have successfully been submitted" or any feedback like that will be good. On the other hand if we can get a list of the trials that were submitted as imported, marked as duplicate or Out of Scope as part of the feedback, that will even be better.
BZDATETIME::2010-04-09 17:43:23
BZCOMMENTOR::Bob Kline
BZCOMMENT::4
I have implemented the requested enhancement on Mahler. In addition, I eliminated a bug which caused the Review Protocols Sent to CIPS version of the program to revert any protocols for which an explicit status was not set back to "not yet reviewed" (from "reviewed - need CIPS feedback").
BZDATETIME::2010-04-12 10:55:50
BZCOMMENTOR::William Osei-Poku
BZCOMMENT::5
(In reply to comment #4)
> I have implemented the requested enhancement on Mahler. In
addition, I
> eliminated a bug which caused the Review Protocols Sent to CIPS
version of the
> program to revert any protocols for which an explicit status was
not set back
> to "not yet reviewed" (from "reviewed - need CIPS feedback").
I tested the feedback change and it looks good. Thanks! I did not quite understand the part about the bug you fixed. Am I supposed to test anything with regards to that?
Please promote to Bach.
BZDATETIME::2010-04-12 11:02:51
BZCOMMENTOR::Bob Kline
BZCOMMENT::6
(In reply to comment #5)
> I tested the feedback change and it looks good. Thanks! I did
not quite
> understand the part about the bug you fixed. Am I supposed to test
anything
> with regards to that?
I don't think so. I'm not even sure the CIPS review option is used any more (if it ever was).
> Please promote to Bach.
Done.
BZDATETIME::2010-04-14 12:00:46
BZCOMMENTOR::William Osei-Poku
BZCOMMENT::7
(In reply to comment #6)
> (In reply to comment #5)
>
> > I tested the feedback change and it looks good. Thanks! I did
not quite
> > understand the part about the bug you fixed. Am I supposed to
test anything
> > with regards to that?
>
> I don't think so. I'm not even sure the CIPS review option is used
any more
> (if it ever was).
>
> > Please promote to Bach.
>
> Done.
Verified on Bach. Issue closed. Thank you!
Elapsed: 0:00:00.000599