EBMS Tickets

Issue Number 550
Summary [Literature] Unreviewed Packets Page
Created 2020-02-11 17:27:42
Issue Type Improvement
Submitted By Juthe, Robin (NIH/NCI) [E]
Assigned To Kline, Bob (NIH/NCI) [C]
Status Closed
Resolved 2020-03-13 11:35:43
Resolution Fixed
Path /home/bkline/backups/jira/oceebms/issue.256602
Description

The following text was taken from OCEEBMS-534, following a decision to break this into two issues:

 

We would like to create a separate UNREVIEWED PACKETS page:

  • The UNREVIEWED PACKETS page would be structured similar to the REVIEWED PACKETS page, with the following differences:

    • Please add fields for the Packet Creation Date as opposed to the Reviewed Date.

    • Please remove the stars beside each packet name (if it's easier to copy the code for reviewed packets and leave the stars, this is fine. We just aren't sure how we would use them.)

    • Please remove the CREATE REPORT button above the list of packets.

    • Please change the last column above the list of packets from Updated to Posted.

  • The packet names should be clickable and provide a page to view the contents of the packet, as is the case for the REVIEWED PACKETS page, but with the following differences from that page:

    • Please remove the CREATE REPORT button above the list of articles.

    • Please change the Updated heading to Posted above the list of articles.

    • Please remove the Disposition heading above the list of articles.

    • Please remove the option to SHOW DETAILS under each article.

    • Please remove the REVIEWER FILES section at the bottom of the page.

    • Please keep all other functionality and display characteristics that we have on the REVIEWED PACKETS pages, including, for example, the display of high priority and other tags, related articles, Board manager comments, and article state information.

Thank you!

Comment entered 2020-02-26 11:04:15 by Kline, Bob (NIH/NCI) [C]

What would be the use of keeping the reviewers checkboxes on the form, or the Reviewer column for the results? (Those are used for identifying board members which have submitted reviews for the packets, not for identifying board members assigned to review the packets.)

Comment entered 2020-02-26 14:17:05 by Kline, Bob (NIH/NCI) [C]

Similar questions about the unreviewed packet page. By definition, there are NO reviews posted for any of the articles in the packet. So what would we put under POSTED for each article? I could see including the date the packet was created in the table caption, but we don't have any per-article dates, unless you mean when the article was added to the EBMS, which seems of dubious value in this context. And what would we put under REVIEWERS on this page? Remember, there aren't any reviews. The list of assigned reviewers is the same for every article in the packet, so it makes no sense to repeat that list over and over.

For this page, the only columns which seem to make any sense are the first column (for the article) and the last column (for the checkbox to mark the article as "don't bother").

If I've missed something, please set me straight. 😛

Comment entered 2020-02-27 08:33:08 by Kline, Bob (NIH/NCI) [C]

I have an implementation which assumes some answers to my questions above.

  1. I kept the reviewer checkboxes on the Unreviewed Packets page's form, changing the name of the field to "Assigned Reviewers" in the hopes of reducing confusion arising from familiarity with what that field does on the original Reviewed Packets page.

  2. I renamed the second column on the Unreviewed Packets page from Reviewer to Assigned To.

  3. I dropped the middle columns for the single unreviewed packet page, listing the assigned reviewers once above the table, rather than repeating the same information for each row in the table.

Please let me know if this will work for you.

Comment entered 2020-02-27 10:33:33 by Juthe, Robin (NIH/NCI) [E]

I agree with all of your assumptions, Bob. I think this looks great. 

 

The only thing I'd add that is that I think it would be helpful to see the posted date on the page displaying a single packet. I agree that we don't need it repeated for each article, since all would have the same posted date, but could it be added to the top where you've listed the assigned reviewers?

Comment entered 2020-02-27 19:20:07 by Kline, Bob (NIH/NCI) [C]

Date added.

Comment entered 2020-03-02 10:56:06 by Juthe, Robin (NIH/NCI) [E]

Verified on DEV. Thanks!

Comment entered 2020-03-12 12:42:39 by Juthe, Robin (NIH/NCI) [E]

It would be helpful if we indicated which articles were included as an FYI in the unreviewed packets. I'll put a ticket in to address this in the next release.

Comment entered 2020-03-12 12:45:48 by Juthe, Robin (NIH/NCI) [E]

After you archive a packet on the Unreviewed Packets page, it brings you to the Reviewed Packets page. Could this bring you back to the Unreviewed Packets page instead?

Comment entered 2020-03-12 18:06:42 by Kline, Bob (NIH/NCI) [C]

Not sure I understand. I don't see any archive buttons on either the Reviewed Packets page or the Unreviewed Packets page.

 

Comment entered 2020-03-13 11:08:04 by Juthe, Robin (NIH/NCI) [E]

Sorry, I should have clarified. It's on the page for an individual unreviewed packet.

Comment entered 2020-03-13 11:35:43 by Kline, Bob (NIH/NCI) [C]

Try it now.

Comment entered 2020-03-13 12:05:07 by Juthe, Robin (NIH/NCI) [E]

Verified on DEV and QA. Thanks!

Comment entered 2020-03-17 17:13:38 by Juthe, Robin (NIH/NCI) [E]

Verified on PROD.

Attachments
File Name Posted User
image-2020-03-12-18-06-20-308.png 2020-03-12 18:06:21 Kline, Bob (NIH/NCI) [C]

Elapsed: 0:00:00.000748