Rule CT0012 - Numeric values in EGSTRESC

RE: Rule CT0012 - Numeric values in EGSTRESC

Hi Dave,

The situation that you're describing is definitely not the intended behaviour, and we've identified it as a bug in the Validator. EGSTRESC values should not be checked against the Controlled Terminology list in cases where they represent numerical data, since this naturally does not make sense.

A report has been file to resolve this issue for the next release, and as I'm fairly certain that it's a configuration issue, a fix may be available before then. We'll let you know when it's been resolved, and in the meantime we apologise for the inconvenience.

Regards,

Tim

RE:RE: Rule CT0012 - Numeric values in EGSTRESC

Thanks -- I will stand by!

RE:RE:RE: Rule CT0012 - Numeric values in EGSTRESC

Hi,

I've gone ahead and submitted a fix to the configuration developers for testing, so assuming that they don't find any problem with it I'll try to have them post an updated configuration this week.

Regards,

Tim

Great-- thank you for letting

Great-- thank you for letting me know

-- Dave

CT0012 Still issuing false errors?

Hello Tim,

I am still getting this error using Validator 1.2.1. I am getting a controlled terminology error when the value for EGSTRESC is copied over from EGORRES. Examples of the data generating flags are "SINUS RHYTHM WITH EPISODES OF TACHYCARDIA", "NORMAL", "NO ECTOPY SEEN". I think that this rule does not make much sense. Unless you copy all the values for EGSTRESC into the define there is no way to prevent this error from occurring. Does the logic of this rule need to change?

Thanks!

RE: CT0012 Still issuing false errors?

Hi David,

You're right, the Validator does still expect you to copy all of the values into the define.xml. The earlier modification was only to avoid this being thrown for numeric values, so terms not present in the Controlled Terminology will still trigger the warning.

Whether or not it even makes sense to perform these checks against the extensible codelists that are not remotely comprehensive is a good question, though. I'll put a ticket in for the configuration team to investigate this and if they decide that it's beneficial to remove the rule, we'll do so in the next release.

Regards,
Tim

RE:RE: Rule CT0012 - Numeric values in EGSTRESC

Hey Tim,

Thanks for reviewing this. I don't think that this rule makes a lot of sense for the EG domain. Keep me updated with your conclusions.

-- Dave