CDR Tickets

Here are the values for the type of change element:

New Doc – New Summary

Revised Doc – Editorial Change

Revised Doc – New or Updated FDA Approval

Revised Doc – External Links

Revised Doc – Special Project

Revised Doc – Other Change

We will create an estimate when the requirements have been posted.

SPECS for DIS Type of Change Report.docx

I have attached the requirements for this report.

Please make the CDR ID in the report a link to the QC report of the DIS. This is not included in the Specs document.

I will provide more specs as well as create a new ticket for the schema changes.

~oseipokuw , you may also want to add a ticket to modify the DIS templates and one ticket to adjust the XMetaL CSS.

The following report has been created to display a type-of-change report for Drug Info Summaries:

• DISTypeChangeReport.py
  https://github.com/NCIOCPL/cdr-admin/commit/d37f8e36

I created the new report by following the functionality of the SummaryTypeChangeReport and I assumed the samples in the spec document were listing the different options of output for the report.  However, taking a closer look at the specs again I realize that you included a second option with very different requirements from the original report.  Is this "Second Option - Historical Changes" supposed to be part of the first option (Most current changes) or should it be a separate interface?

In the description for the report you're saying: "This report will display all DISs with a recorded type of change for a given timeframe."  but then you're listing the following options to be chosen by the user

I. Select one or more summary
II. Enter Date Range
III. Select order by title or type-of-change

If the report is supposed to display all summaries why would we need to select summaries?

[quote}

Is this "Second Option - Historical Changes" supposed to be part of the first option (Most current changes) or should it be a separate interface?

It is preferable to have it as part of the same interface but a different option where if you click on that option, it gives you additional sub options to choose from. 

bq. If the report is supposed to display all summaries why would we need to select summaries?

Verified on DEV. Thanks!

Verified on QA. Thanks!

I think this may need some more discussion. Christina pointed out when she was testing that the report can only be run for a single DIS, which isn't all that useful from a management perspective. I can't figure out how to get multiple DIS to display as shown in William's specs or as described on the interface ("One Table For All Drug Info Summaries And Changes"), but I could be missing something. Is there a way to run the report for multiple/all DIS?

If not, could we add another option to view the report for all DIS, or to make the title/CDR ID fields optional?

Christina also pointed out that it would be useful to do either a targeted search by date and summary type (single-agent vs. drug combination) or to be able to pick a particular type of change and see those select summaries. I've added Christina to this issue so she can follow the discussion and weigh in as well.

FYI - I won't be in the CDR meeting this afternoon since it's during my Board meeting but I'll be available after 2:30 if you want to have a call to discuss this issue. I'm guessing the CDR meeting will be over by then.

It looks like Christina's observations are right. The current and historical reports still require at least one CDR ID or title in order to run which should not be the case. I am not sure if this worked well on DEV or not. I will find out from Mary.  However, you can run the report for multiple DIS's by entering the CDR IDs and separating them by commas.  We can discuss this in the CDR meeting or at another time.

It looks like Christina's observations are right. The current and historical reports still require at least one CDR ID or title in order to run

Yes, this is how I read the specs.  It isn't mentioned that in the absence of a CDR-ID or Title the report should be run for all DIS.  In fact, you're getting an error message if neither a CDR-ID nor a title fragment have been entered indicating that at least one document needs to be specified.

As discussed elsewhere the additional option to run the report for all DIS will be implemented in the Newton release.  As a work-around the report may be used to entering all CDR IDs for the DIS documents.  I created an ad-hoc query that would allow the users to copy/paste the CDR IDs into the ID field.

Robin had asked to add some text and a link to easily find this ad-hoc query.  This addition is ready for review on DEV.

What is the name of the ad-hoc query, "DIS  Show only CDR-IDs" ?

The fact that you are asking this question indicates that the text isn't clear.  Yes, the ad-hoc query is named "DIS Show only CDR-IDs".  

Would you have a suggestion on how to modify the text to be understood better?

 Would you have a suggestion on how to modify the text to be understood better? 

DIS Type of Change Report CDR IDs

~juther, please see William's comment above. 

Would you be OK with changing the name of the query from "DIS  Show only CDR-IDs" to "DIS Type of Change Report CDR IDs"?

Or "CDR IDs for DIS Type of Change Report". The only problem with this is that it will not be included in the list of DIS ad hoc queries.

How about "DIS CDR IDs for Type of Change Report". This has the advantage of being grouped with the other DIS queries, as William points out. Thanks!

I think the explanatory text looks good on DEV. It's a little long but I think it's worthwhile having it. We'll just need to update the name of the ad hoc query.

The name of the ad-hoc query has been changed and the text on the report's page has been adjusted. 

This is ready on DEV.

Verified on DEV. Thanks!

The latest updates have been pushed to github:

• DISTypeChangeReport.py
  https://github.com/NCIOCPL/cdr-admin/commit/3c90120

Are the changes on QA yet ? I don't seem to see it.

Bob will first need to incorporate the latest changes to this report which I was able to save to github today into the build that's used on QA.  He will let us know when that's done.

Done.

Thanks!

Verified on QA.

Verified on PROD. Thanks!