Enhancements and Feature Requests

I wish there were a way to delete a forum post. 

In the report generated by OpenCDISC, you have the location of the path of the configuration file but you don't have the version of OpenCDISC that generated the report.  I get reports from clients and it is extremely helpful to know whcih version of OpenCDISC they used as we respond to issues.

Will OpenCDISC include QS SDTM CT in the validation checks for TEST/TESTCD? If so, when?

Thanks!

Will the validator be made to run on CDASH so we can run it up front before the data is converted to SDTM format?  Is there support to make it run on this format?

thanks

I'm probably just missing it, but is there a flat display available for the forum?  The indenting one makes the replies to eventually get too narrow and wastes a bunch of space.

Is there a search feature available for the forum?  I can't seem to find one.  If there isn't, can it be added so I can see if answers to my questions are already asked/answered?

Thanks,
Matt

SDTM allows FA to be broken into FAxx datasets, just as SUPP can be broken into SUPPxx datasets. OpenCDISC will process SUPPxx datasets but not FAxx datasets. I can work around this by combining all my FAxx datasets into a single FA for the purposes of OpenCDISC checking, but that's a bit of a pain. Can the tool be enhanced to process both FA and FAxx datasets?

Hello Everybody,

First we wanted to thank the community for this great tool and sharing it.

We have one feature request concerning the data files for example in SDTM validation:

Please add the possibility to validate xml data besides classical DELIMITED and the propriatary SAS XPORT format.

As the validator can read xml files anyway we hope this is not a too big effort.

best regards

Nicolas Gerig

mathiesen & mathiesen AG

Hi,

It would be a nice enhancement/feature to user choose between multiple versions of the NCI CDISC SDTM CT list. In some cases, a study may have been conducted utilizing an earlier version; albeit, may also be concurrently producing another study with a recent version. Therefore, it would be beneficial to have the option in choosing as to which version of the CT a user wishes to produce validation results from. This is a definite need when one considers the CT as a living document, one that continously evolves.

Thanks

For checks related to comparing 2 dates, e.g., --STDTC ≥ --ENDTC, suggest to take partial into account.  Currently, a --STDTC = '2009' and --ENDTC = '2009-11-19' trigger SD0013 "Begin day must be less than or equal to end day".  Since month and day are unknown in --STDTC, this finding is arguably a false positive.  My suggestion is to use the lowest common date/time component.  Therefore, in the example above, compare "2009" to "2009".

Operating environment:
v1.2 USB version, Windows XP Professional SP3, off-the-shelf configurations