2018 CEDEN Template Modification Requests
 Share
The version of the browser you are using is no longer supported. Please upgrade to a supported browser.Dismiss

 
View only
 
 
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZAA
1
CEDEN Template Modification Requests
2
Please add comments (in support or in opposition to the change) in columns to the right. One commenter per cell. For example, if one person agrees that the appropriate CodeListName should be added, the first comment of support should be typed in cell E19. If another person also supports that change, the second commenter should type is cell F19.
3
4
5
Disposition
Request No.
ItemChangeChange JustificationComment 1Comment 2Comment 3Comment 4Comment 5
6
Agree1Notes_Information > Section on Grey with blue boldRemoveAs the station tab isn't in the data entry templates, this coding shouldn't be included for simplicity.agree
7
Agree2Notes_Information > NewAdd link to the CV request template/link about CV requestshttp://www.ceden.org/vocabulary_request.shtmlagree
20
Agree15Guidance > VariableCodesLookupAdd the appropriate CodeListNameagree
21
Agree16Chemistry > ChemResults (Blank) > First two rows of Blank TemplateFixFirst two rows are formatted like header (bold/vertical) which can lead to incorrect formats, an inconvenience for the provider, and/or inaccurate results in checks.agree
22
Agree17Chemistry > ChemResults (Blank) > AnalysisDateChange formatting to match example templateShows providers it is date + time field (likely fixed with change to first two rows)agree
23
Agree18Chemistry > ChemResults (Blank) > PrepPreservationDateChange formatting to match example templateShows providers it is date + time field (likely fixed with change to first two rows)agree
24
Agree19Chemistry > ChemResults (Blank) > DigestExtractDateChange formatting to match example templateShows providers it is date + time field, I think you could just take one row from the example template and paste formatting for the first bit of the blank template?agree
25
Review whether checker would need to be reworked. If not, then proceed./ I tried moving the SampleID and checker didn't seem to notice20Tissue > *Composite > SampleIDMove to the POE sectionIt's currently out of place and is leading providers to either not complete it or put in the wrong level of identifier. It is before TissueCollectionComments.agree
33
Use hover and guidance to clarify (after finding out which is the correct one)28Toxicity > Both > TestDurationChange to TestDurationCodeCurrent column name leaves abiguity between Name/CodeAgree,but should be changed to ToxTestDurCode to match the actual DB table name in ToxTestDurLookUp. All data checkers, loaders, and documentation will need to be updated.
34
Use hover and guidance to clarify (after finding out which is the correct one)29Toxicity > Both > TimePointChate to TimePointName/CodeCurrent column name leaves abiguity between Name/Code, guidance doesn't clarifyAgree with TimePointCode. All data checkers, loaders, and documentation will need to be updated.
38
programmer will evaluate workload; find out number; it is check number CEDEN_C_197; issue 1922433Chem Checker > Duplicate entry in Results worksheet. The combination of columns A-C, F,H,J-M,O and U-Z must be unique for environmental samples within worksheet.Add Column N (CollectionDeviceName) to this checkCollectionDeviceName is part of the primary key, the check is incorrect. EventCode and ProtocolCode should be added as well.Agree. All data checkers will need to be updated.
39
programmer will evaluate using SWAMP check which converts time+date and checks to see if they are within 24hrs; error CEDEN_C_251; issue 1922534Chem Checker > LabBatch with multiple AnalysisDatesEither only check on a conversion of values to Date only, or RemoveAnalysisDate is a Date + Time field. We want to allow AnalysisDate to be different if labs are accurately reporting their results. Checker should only check for the same date, not including time so that this error isn't encountered as often. As is, providers are encouraged to strip out the time component so this warning isn't received.This check should be a warning - stripping out the time may lead to incorrect analysis dates/times being missed. Recommend leaving check and making it a warning in which case data providers can still submit the file
40
No change. The QA officer can update. Consider adding a "pending' option; request submitted35Chem Checker > Missing BatchVerificationCode, a required field.Switch to warning, change messageOnly required for upload. A QA Officer for the project should be assigning this, not labs. This error leads to confusion if additional verfication is going to occur after submittal.SInce this field is required it must be populate with a default of NR - cannot change to a warning.
41
Agree36Chem Checker > Missing Replicate, a required field.Fix template formatting or fix the checkerThe example records are formatted as numbers, but the rows below are formatted as text. If there is a combination, the text values are not recognized.Replicate should be formatted as a number (integer) in the template to match the DB requirement.
45
No change.40Chem Checker >Did not expect LabReplicate to be 2.RemoveI think this is based off of SampleID. This shouldn't be a check. A lab replicate of a sample shouldn't have a different SampleID.This error isn't necessarily caused by SampleID issues. The point is correct, but the circumstances are more complicated.This check (CEDEN_C_239) is not based off SampleID or LabSampleID. It occurs when there is a LabReplicate of 2 with no associated original sample (LabReplicate = 1) based on Unique Constraint fields.
58
will work to provide in output as a calculated field53ToxicityRequire both Percent Effect and Percent ControlThe sum of these two fields should equal 100. The inclusion of these fields will also overcome situations where a “-88” qualifier can get confused with an actual percent effect.disagree; I think we were advocating for PercentEffect to be required (is currently in the template) at the point of transition. We have always maintained that we should not have two fields reported that mean the same thing in case one produces an error but instead provide both in the export as a calculated field
60
Agree55ToxicityRequire QA Control IDThis is the Lab ID for the Control sample used to calculate the test statistics. It is needed to allow end users to check fhe integrity of the data.agree
63
Agree58AllRemove SCCWRP and confirm correct linksIncreases the user-friendliness of templatesagree
64
Agree59Vocab Request Template > ProgramNameAdd character limit in header commentIncreases the user-friendliness of templatesagree
65
Agree60Vocab Request Template > ProjectNameAdd character limit in header commentIncreases the user-friendliness of templatesagree
66
Agree61Vocab Request Template > ParentProjectNameAdd character limit in header commentIncreases the user-friendliness of templatesagree
67
Agree62Vocab Request Template > StationNameAdd character limit in header commentIncreases the user-friendliness of templatesagree
68
Agree63Vocab Request Template > ProtocolNameAdd character limit in header commentIncreases the user-friendliness of templatesagree
69
Agree64Vocab Request Template > StationsOrder columns so required fields are togetherSometime waterbody type is not completed so the record can't be loaded and/or an additional back and forth is needed with the provideragree
70
Agree65Vocab Request Template > FieldResEquipRemove notesDoesn't apply to CEDENagree
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
Loading...
Main menu