CDR Tickets

BZDATETIME::2011-10-18 11:08:41
BZCOMMENTOR::William Osei-Poku
BZCOMMENT::1

BZDATETIME::2011-10-24 17:07:15
BZCOMMENTOR::Margaret Beckwith
BZCOMMENT::2

I bumped the priority up on this issue so that we can start working with the LO to transfer trials.

BZDATETIME::2011-10-24 17:48:00
BZCOMMENTOR::Volker Englisch
BZCOMMENT::3

What information do we need to see on that report?
I'm guessing we need CDR-ID, Protocol-ID, LeadOrgRole, Org-ID, Country
Anything else?

Currently I'm getting around 3200 protocols with foreign Lead Orgs. Here is a list of these:
4 (Yes, no country!)
Argentina 105
Australia 76
Austria 7
Belgium 921
Brazil 39
Chile 12
China 10
Colombia 2
Costa Rica 6
Cuba 3
Czech Republic 4
Denmark 22
Finland 5
France 350
Germany 147
Greece 1
Honduras 1
Hungary 2
Iceland 1
India 2
Ireland 31
Israel 8
Italy 140
Jamaica 1
Japan 46
Lebanon 7
Mexico 28
Netherlands 81
New Zealand 1
Norway 13
Peru 29
Poland 8
Portugal 2
Puerto Rico 4
Republic of Korea 24
Republic of Singapore 19
Republic of South Africa 27
Russia 2
Spain 18
Sweden 12
Switzerland 257
Taiwan, Province of China 1
United Kingdom 738
Uruguay 13
Venezuela 5

BZDATETIME::2011-10-24 18:06:23
BZCOMMENTOR::Volker Englisch
BZCOMMENT::4

Here are just the European countries:

Austria 7
Belgium 921
Czech Republic 4
Denmark 22
Finland 5
France 350
Germany 147
Greece 1
Hungary 2
Iceland 1
Ireland 31
Italy 140
Netherlands 81
Norway 13
Poland 8
Portugal 2
Russia 2
Spain 18
Sweden 12
Switzerland 257
United Kingdom 738

BZDATETIME::2011-10-24 18:53:33
BZCOMMENTOR::William Osei-Poku
BZCOMMENT::5

In order to get one report to send to the liaison office, it would be good to have one excel workbook that has tabs for each of the European Institutions showing their trials and contact information and also indicating which trials have already been transferred. If a trial is transferred, it moves on to the list of transferred trials for that institution. Also, the Liaison office report has links to cancer.gov so it would be good to have that in this report also. Like the transfer report, this report should limit the output to trials that have been registered with CTGov and therefore have NCT IDs.
The problem with the above approach is that we will be sending the liaison office trials that they did not submit to PDQ since we are not using the source as part of the selection criteria.
In the absence of one comprehensive report for all of the European Institutions in one workbook, we can run individual transfer reports for each of the European institutions on demand. However, the transfer report does not have a links to cancer.gov for the trials.

The columns should include the following:
DocID
NCT-ID
Primary Protocol ID
Alternate ID
Source
"Date First Published"
"Date Last Modified"
"Date Last Verified"
Transfer Response
Transfer Response Date
Protocol Status
Status Date
Primary Lead Org Name (This is probably not needed since a tab would represent the org)
LO Personnel
Phone
Email

BZDATETIME::2011-10-25 09:11:07
BZCOMMENTOR::Margaret Beckwith
BZCOMMENT::6

We may also be using this report to have CTRP send the lists of trials to each organization after they create a PRS account and contact CTRP through pdqupdate. I am working with the LO to figure out what approach makes the most sense. So having the lists broken down by each organization will be helpful.

BZDATETIME::2011-10-26 11:36:10
BZCOMMENTOR::Volker Englisch
BZCOMMENT::7

(In reply to comment #5)
> The problem with the above approach is that we will be sending the liaison
> office trials that they did not submit to PDQ since we are not using the
> source as part of the selection criteria.

I thought we had abandoned OCECDR-3427 in favor of this issue/report because there doesn't exist a source for all trials?

> In the absence of one comprehensive report for all of the European
> Institutions in one workbook, we can run individual transfer reports

Sorry, but could you please tell me which report you're referring to as the 'transfer report'?

> However, the transfer report does not have a
> links to cancer.gov for the trials.

I am starting to get a little bit confused now:

• We started out with the Liaison Office Report which we have abandoned.

• Then we talked about a report to identify European LOs and SLOs

• Now I'm hearing an Excel report with all organizations as worksheets and/or
  a manually run transfer report.

I'm guessing that the 'All Orgs' Excel report (I'm counting 352 organizations) is a wish list and it makes more sense to go with the transfer report, correct?
If so are we going to create a new report modeled after the transfer report or are we going to modify the transfer report to include missing columns?
Or did I get all of this wrong?

BZDATETIME::2011-10-26 12:36:03
BZCOMMENTOR::William Osei-Poku
BZCOMMENT::8

(In reply to comment #7)
> (In reply to comment #5)
> > The problem with the above approach is that we will be sending the liaison
> > office trials that they did not submit to PDQ since we are not using the
> > source as part of the selection criteria.
>
> I thought we had abandoned OCECDR-3427 in favor of this issue/report because there
> doesn't exist a source for all trials?
>
That is correct. So the report we desire for this issue will not be using source as a criteria.
>
> > In the absence of one comprehensive report for all of the European
> > Institutions in one workbook, we can run individual transfer reports
>
> Sorry, but could you please tell me which report you're referring to as the
> 'transfer report'?
>
The transfer report is the "Protocol Transfer of Ownership Responses by Org/Status"

CIAT/OCCM Staff > Reports >Protocols >Protocol Transfer of Ownership Responses by Org/Status

>
> > However, the transfer report does not have a
> > links to cancer.gov for the trials.
>
> I am starting to get a little bit confused now:
> - We started out with the Liaison Office Report which we have abandoned.
> - Then we talked about a report to identify European LOs and SLOs
> - Now I'm hearing an Excel report with all organizations as worksheets and/or
> a manually run transfer report.

My apologies for the confusion. The bottom line is that we need a new report for the transfer European trials. We could use the the existing transfer report mentioned above, however, since the liaison office is also going to be using this report, it would not be helpful to them because they don't have access to the CDR to look up trials for example. That is why, we need a report with links to cancer.gov like the original liaison office report. The other limitation of the existing transfer report is that, there is no way to run the report for multiple institutions at the same time and have one comprehensive report for all European trials. That is why, I am suggesting a new report in this issue.
>
> I'm guessing that the 'All Orgs' Excel report (I'm counting 352 organizations)
> is a wish list and it makes more sense to go with the transfer report, correct?
> If so are we going to create a new report modeled after the transfer report or
> are we going to modify the transfer report to include missing columns?
> Or did I get all of this wrong?

A new report would be appropriate since the existing report would continue to be used for domestic transfers and it doesn't need some of the fields or features that we desire for this report.

Should we discuss any difficulties with this request in our meeting tomorrow to clarify issues?

BZDATETIME::2011-10-26 13:35:16
BZCOMMENTOR::Volker Englisch
BZCOMMENT::9

(In reply to comment #8)
> Should we discuss any difficulties with this request in our meeting
> tomorrow to clarify issues?

At this point I only have difficulties understanding which version of a report to create.
a) One report with two individual worksheets for each organization.
A potential problem I see would be the fact that worksheet names can only be
about 30 characters long. If you're using the CDR-ID as the worksheet
name that wouldn't be a problem.

b) One report with two worksheets for transferred and not transferred listing
all of the organizations

c) A report that will be run individually for each organization.

d) Other?

BZDATETIME::2011-10-26 13:53:35
BZCOMMENTOR::William Osei-Poku
BZCOMMENT::10

(In reply to comment #9)
> (In reply to comment #8)
> > Should we discuss any difficulties with this request in our meeting
> > tomorrow to clarify issues?
>
> At this point I only have difficulties understanding which version of a report
> to create.
> a) One report with two individual worksheets for each organization.
> A potential problem I see would be the fact that worksheet names can only
> be
> about 30 characters long. If you're using the CDR-ID as the worksheet
> name that wouldn't be a problem.
>
This is preferable to all the others. I think it is okay to use the name of the institution and let it truncate after 38 characters. If the institutional names are in alphabetical order, they should still be recognizable.

BZDATETIME::2011-10-26 14:01:29
BZCOMMENTOR::Volker Englisch
BZCOMMENT::11

You are aware that this would mean about 700 worksheets, right? I counted earlier 352 distinct organizations.

Let's cross our fingers that MS Excel allows this many. :-)

BZDATETIME::2011-10-27 18:24:32
BZCOMMENTOR::Volker Englisch
BZCOMMENT::12

We discussed this at our meeting and decided that for now we want to create a report listing the foreign organizations along with their trials and the trial status.

BZDATETIME::2011-10-28 11:04:45
BZCOMMENTOR::Volker Englisch
BZCOMMENT::13

(In reply to comment #12)
> We discussed this at our meeting and decided that for now we want to create a
> report listing the foreign organizations along with their trials and the trial
> status.

Do we want this listing for closed protocols only or should we include active protocols as well?

BZDATETIME::2011-10-28 12:43:30
BZCOMMENTOR::William Osei-Poku
BZCOMMENT::14

(In reply to comment #13)

> Do we want this listing for closed protocols only or should we include active
> protocols as well?

I think it should include both active and closed protocols but separate the closed protocols from the active protocols.

BZDATETIME::2011-10-28 13:59:08
BZCOMMENTOR::Volker Englisch
BZCOMMENT::15

(In reply to comment #14)
> separate the closed protocols from the active protocols.

I'm not sure how you would want this to be separated. I figure for now I'll just sort the spreadsheet by organization and status.

BZDATETIME::2011-10-28 14:03:12
BZCOMMENTOR::Volker Englisch
BZCOMMENT::16

European Organizations and their trials.

Attachment EuropeanOrgs.xml has been added with description: European Trials

BZDATETIME::2011-10-28 14:13:41
BZCOMMENTOR::William Osei-Poku
BZCOMMENT::17

(In reply to comment #15)
> (In reply to comment #14)
> > separate the closed protocols from the active protocols.
>
> I'm not sure how you would want this to be separated. I figure for now I'll
> just sort the spreadsheet by organization and status.

I didn't know you were producing a spreadsheet. I thought you were doing a count of the trials.

BZDATETIME::2011-10-28 15:46:57
BZCOMMENTOR::William Osei-Poku
BZCOMMENT::18

(In reply to comment #16)
> Created attachment 2173 [details]
> European Trials
>
> European Organizations and their trials.

Please don't report trials for secondary lead orgs, it seems those trials are duplicated and we don't have to transfer those trials twice. Show only primary lead org trials. Also, are you showing only trials that have been published to clinicaltrials.gov ?

BZDATETIME::2011-10-31 10:49:35
BZCOMMENTOR::Volker Englisch
BZCOMMENT::19

Updated report now showing only organizations with Role=Primary and trials with NCT-ID.

Attachment EuropeanOrgs_20111031T094745.xml has been added with description: European Trials

BZDATETIME::2011-11-02 13:53:22
BZCOMMENTOR::William Osei-Poku
BZCOMMENT::20

I just wanted to mention briefly that we have started receiving requests for transfer of trials from foreign institutions. The requests are mostly for transfer of individual trials. If we see that there are more trials to be transferred for that institution or update person, we are contacting the liaison office with a list of trials to be sent to the update person for 'permission' to transfer them as well. So it seems the existing transfer report would work for these transfers as well. Besides, I checked the existing transfer reports again and they do show closed and completed trials. We will however, need specific scheduled email notifications for the transfer of foreign trials since Lockheed does not transfer those trials. CTGov staff do the transfer of foreign trials. We can discuss this further tomorrow.

BZDATETIME::2011-11-07 13:47:02
BZCOMMENTOR::Volker Englisch
BZCOMMENT::21

Based on the discussion at Thursday's meeting this report is already in use, so I'm marking the issue as 'Fixed'.

BZDATETIME::2011-12-14 14:27:21
BZCOMMENTOR::William Osei-Poku
BZCOMMENT::22

At the video conference with the Liaison Office yesterday, it was decided that we should not continue to create this report for the LO. I am marking this issue as closed.