Forums: Validation Rule Suggestions
Hi Ameilia,
Thank you for reporting your findings! Unfortunately there are still few incorrect metadata specs in validator.
Please confirm your validation results. I've double checked your examples in validator specifications. Some of them look confusing.
We can update validation specifications on website. However I am not sure if it's the best option for quick fix of such minor findings. We need to be careful with version control.
Kind Regards,
Sergiy
Hi Sergyi,
Please ignore my comment related to PC.VISITDY and PCRFTDTC. It was an inconsistency on my end :) not in define.xml (where I was looking for the labels), but in headers of the xpts.
Thanks a lot for everything!
Hello all,
I just used the 1.4.1 version to validate on sone studies and validate them for SEND.
I notices some inconsistencies with the SEND 3.0 standard:
#1. SE0063 - SEND/dataset variable label mismatch :
- Validator expects "Planned Study Day of Collection" as label for PC VISITDY, but in SEND specs this is "Visit Day".
- Validator expects "Date/Time of Reference Time Point" as label for PC PCRFTDTC, but in SEND specs it is "Date/Time of Reference Point". Same for PP PPRFTDTC.
- Validator expects "Reference Range for Char Rslt-Std Units" for LB LBSTNRC, but in SEND specs it is "Reference Range for
Char Rslt-Std Unit" (no "s" at the end).
Or should we disregard the SEND standard and update the labels for these variables on our end?
#2. SD1079 Variable is in wrong order within domain
- Reported for PPSTINT, PP. But PPSTINT is wrongly placed as order in config-send-3.0.xml.
- Same obs for MIMETHOD in MI.