EBMS Tickets

According to the actual code, the current logic includes articles on the page from which the board member can still do reviews if the current state sequence number is equal to or lower than the sequence number for the FYI state, as long as the current state is not actually the FYI state. There are other factors at work, such as whether the packet is active, and the drop flag is not set, but I think the logic summary above is the relevant part for the purpose of this ticket. Here are the states with their sequence numbers:

+---------------------+----------+
| state_text_id       | sequence |
+---------------------+----------+
| ReadyInitReview     |       10 |
| RejectJournalTitle  |       20 |
| RejectInitReview    |       30 |
| PassedInitReview    |       30 |
| Published           |       40 |
| RejectBMReview      |       50 |
| PassedBMReview      |       50 |
| FullReviewHold      |       60 |
| FYI                 |       60 |
| PassedFullReview    |       60 |
| RejectFullReview    |       60 |
| OnHold              |       70 |
| AgendaWrkGrpDiscuss |       70 |
| AgendaBoardDiscuss  |       70 |
| AgendaFutureChg     |       70 |
| AgendaNoPaprChg     |       70 |
| NotForAgenda        |       70 |
| FullEnd             |       70 |
| OnAgenda            |       80 |
| FinalBoardDecision  |       90 |
+---------------------+----------+

If I understand you correctly, that logic should be modified to "if the current state sequence number is equal to or lower than the sequence number for the OnAgenda state, unless the current state is the FYI state." Is that right?

I'm not sure how board manager actions would come into the equation, as I'm not seeing anything in the query that would take those into account. Could you give me an example of an article dropped solely because it had a board manager action, but whose current state was 70 or lower?

I think the logic should be modified to "if the current state sequence number is equal to or lower than the sequence number for the OnHold state, unless the current state is the FYI state."

Each of the states with a sequence # of 70 refer to various Board manager action values. The following packet on QA (CAM Overview (January 2018) - TEST [Packet #16023]) contains a single citation that has a Board manager action value of "paper for board discussion". The packet was moved to the completed packets page prematurely for board members who haven't responded yet (including Test Board Member 2).

think the logic should be modified to "if the current state sequence number is equal to or lower than the sequence number for the OnHold state, unless the current state is the FYI state."

I don't understand how that would achieve the stated goals given in the ticket description above. If I understood what you wrote correctly, you did not want the OnAgenda state to knock the article off the list of things for the board members to review ("...but not for Board manager actions or On Agenda status changes." – emphasis added). That's why I proposed ...

"if the current state sequence number is equal to or lower than the sequence number for the OnAgenda state, unless the current state is the FYI state."

What have I missed?

You're right - sorry. I was thinking about this backwards. We want the Board members to be able to review the citation unless (and until) it has an Editorial Board decision. So, the logic would be "if the current state sequence number is equal to or lower than the sequence number for the FinalBoardDecision state, unless the current state is the FYI state"... does that make sense? The table above is cut off, but it looks like that would be a sequence # of 90.

... equal to or lower than the sequence number for the FinalBoardDecision state ...

Now I think you've gone too far in the other direction. If we include on the board member's review page articles whose state is equal to the FinalBoardDecision state, we wouldn't be in compliance with "We expect this to occur for Ed. Board decisions ...." (in other words, we'd lose the enhancement you referred to).

By the way, JIRA is more than a little confusing in it's layout, but there's a scroll bar on the table above.

Let's discuss this tomorrow. 🙂

OK, per our discussion, we'd like to have citations still available for review if they are at the OnAgenda state or lower (80 or lower). Thanks for your help and patience!

The new logic requirement has been implemented on DEV. Please verify that it is doing what you expect.

This is working as expected on DEV. Thank you!

This is not working correctly on QA. A packet containing two articles with a "Board Manager Action" Status was moved to the completed page. See Gallbladder Cancer (March 2018) - TEST [Packet #16027].

Is it possible that it was copied there instead of moved (in other words, appearing on both pages)?

Well, it's interesting. When you navigate to the packet from the Literature tab, you only see it on the Assigned Packets page (and not on the Completed Packets page). However, if you click on the shortcut to the packet on the home page (from the Literature activity feed), then it brings you to the Gallbladder packet on the Completed Packets page.

Try it now. I had modified the logic for the method which determines when the packet leaves the "you can review these" pile, but not the logic for the method which determines when the packet lands on the completed page.

Ah, much better. Thanks!

Excellent!

Verified on QA.

We haven't received any reports of this not working on PROD so I am closing this ticket.