EBMS Tickets

Implemented on DEV; ready for user testing.

We've reviewed this in DEV and have several comments.

On the page that lists all of the archived packets:

1. Please change the name of the new page from "ARCHIVED REVIEWS" to "COMPLETED PACKETS". Only fully completed packets should display on this page.

2. We would like the page to display the following columns: Packet Name, Date Completed, Number of Articles.
-Date Completed refers to the date that the entire packet was completed, i.e., the date the last review was submitted.
-Number of articles refers to the number of articles originally assigned to the packet (we aren't worried about dropped articles at this time).

3. Please make the Packet Name and Date Complted columns sortable.

4. Please limit the data on this page to packets that were completed in the last 2 years.

On the page that lists the reviews of articles in a single packet:

1. Please add links to view the abstract and download the full text beneath the bibliographic information for the article.

2. Please list the articles alphabetically by the first author's last name.

3. Please add "Reviewed By: ..." after each article, and populate the "..." with the names of reviewers who have completed reviews of that article.

4. Please replace the dropped article wording with the following statement, when applicable: "This article was removed from the packet by your Board Manager."

5. Please remove the POST DOCUMENT button.

6. Please display reviewer uploads for a packet here regardless of whether the documents have been archived (this may be the way it is now, but we just want to be sure).

As discussed, we understand these changes may wind up pushing this issue to iteration 3.

Thank you!

Only fully completed packets should display on this page.

I assume a "fully completed packet" would be one for which every reviewer has competed a review for each article assigned to the packet and not subsequently dropped from the packet. Right?

... we aren't worried about dropped articles ...

So, you're confident reviewers won't see a packet in the list with five articles, two of which were dropped, and the other three reviewed by the board member looking at the page, and worry that they've left some work undone?

Please list the articles alphabetically by the first author's last name.

What about corporate authors? Intersperse them with the personal author surname order? List them separately from the personal author sequence?

Please remove the POST DOCUMENT button.

So, how will this requirement work?

... they should still be able to upload a summary document to the packet once they have completed their literature reviews.

1. Fully completed packets - What I meant by Fully completed packets was that every article had been reviewed by the logged-in user, NOT by everyone who was assigned to the packet. Sorry, I should have been clearer about that.

2. Dropped articles - Yes, we drop articles so rarely that we do not see this as a problem. Board members could also view the full page of reviews and see that two of the articles had been removed from the packet if they were curious.

3. Corporate authors - Do we have a precedent for this elsewhere in the site where we can sort by article? (on the citations by status report, for example)

4. Post document - That's a good point, but we're concerned that we'll miss uploads if they can go back to any old packet and post a document to it. I'd like to ask the other Board managers about this and will get back to you.

After some discussion, we've decided that we would like to keep the "post document" link, as originally requested. It was helpful to revisit this.

All of the new requirements for this ticket have been implemented; ready for user testing on DEV.

For deployment:

• R12163 trunk/ebms/ebms.nci.nih.gov/modules/custom/ebms/common.inc

• R12163 trunk/ebms/ebms.nci.nih.gov/modules/custom/ebms/review.inc

Promoted to QA.

There seems to be a bug in the "reviewed by" line on the page for a completed packet. The name of the reviewer appears to be repeated the same number of times as there are articles in the packet. For example, in a packet I just created on QA (Genetics of Breast and Ovarian Cancer (QA Test Packet 1-8-14)), in which there are 3 articles (all reviewed by Test Baord Member), the reviewed by line under each article reads:

Reviewed by Test Board Member, Test Board Member, Test Board Member.

I will attached a screenshot.

Wasn't anticipating the same reviewer submitting multiple reviews when that code was written. Fixed on DEV and QA. Please test again.

Please give Board members visibility to other reviewers' decisions in their completed packets. Thanks.

Bob and I just reviewed a few literature packets on QA together and we noticed that packets with dropped articles are not being removed from the Board member's Assigned Packets page and moved to his/her Completed Packets page (presumably because the Board member did not review the dropped article). The packet should move to the completed page if all of the un-dropped articles have been reviewed.

Please give Board members visibility to other reviewers' decisions in their completed packets.

Should we drop the "Reviewed by ...." line, which will now be redundant?

Yes, good idea. Thanks.

Done.

I think I've completed all the outstanding work for this ticket (on DEV). Please test carefully, as it's complicated! 🙂

As we discussed yesterday, please change the default sort to the date the packet was completed (the default sort is currently by packet name). The most recent completion date should be on the top of the page. Thanks.

Sort altered (DEV and QA).

Verified on QA.

Verified (as well as we can) on prod. Victoria confirmed that Eric Seifter has access to his old packets now.