Review ask

As a clinical trial statistician or programmer, answer two short questions in Your review: the task and the inputs. Agreeing with both approves this benchmark; disagreeing with either needs a comment. Propose a fix with the Edit button on any source file, or add it to your comments.

We suggest spending no more than 5 minutes on a review. The other tabs beside Your review are background for assessment, not under review.

Summary

Lifecycle: draftEditUnder review
What this benchmark means
README.md

Public entries: Python and R. Passing coverage requires an installed inventory.

Goal: build one record per subject carrying the age (AGE) from the demographics and the planned arm (ARM) from the treatment assignments.

Input: collected demographics and planned treatment assignments, each holding one record per subject.

Variables:

  • AGE would be the age in years as collected.
  • ARM would be the planned arm of the subject's treatment assignment.

Note: both inputs hold subject records, and nothing says which one supplies the subjects of the dataset. A subject present in only one of them would appear or not depending on that choice, so the run is rejected before any data is read and no artifact is accepted.

How to fix

Decide which input lists the subjects of the dataset, and name it as the base. The demographics list every subject; the treatment assignments are read for each of them:

base: DM

Expected failure

Edit
the run is rejected; no artifact is accepted
expected/error.yaml
phase
validation
condition
driver_unavailable
rule
ROW-8
expected/error.yaml
phase: validation
condition: driver_unavailable
spec_paths:
  - base
rule: ROW-8
context:
  row: null

Inputs

Under review
2 source files

input/dm.csv

Edit
2 rows
input/dm.csv
STUDYIDUSUBJIDAGE
YAMAA-0146
YAMAA-0163

input/trt.csv

Edit
2 rows
input/trt.csv
STUDYIDUSUBJIDARM
YAMAA-01Placebo
YAMAA-01Drug A

Unexpected Output

Under review
No artifact is produced

No fixture files in this directory.

Shaded columns are derived— = missing value

Human review and assessment

Your review

2 questions and your comments · View benchmark discussions

Mapping spec

Generated from the benchmark YAML; do not edit by hand

Dataset NameVariable NameVariable LabelTypeCodelist/Controlled TermsCoreComputational MethodOrigin
ADSLSTUDYIDStudy IdentifiercharacterCopy value from DM.STUDYID.Predecessor
ADSLUSUBJIDUnique Subject IdentifiercharacterCopy value from DM.USUBJID.Predecessor
ADSLAGEAgenumericCopy value from DM.AGE.Predecessor
ADSLARMDescription of Planned ArmcharacterCopy value from TRT.ARM.Predecessor
VersionDateAuthorDescriptionReviewerSign-off
1.72026-10-20yamaa docs buildRead a specification in the 1.0 surface as its 0.5 counterpart; state that missing values stay missing where a mapping declares no missing handler, and leave out a declared missing answer that restates a handler's default
1.62026-10-17yamaa docs buildDescribe collected date parts written as ISO 8601 date text and times of day counted in seconds since midnight
1.52026-10-17yamaa docs buildName collected precision in words instead of letter codes; state imputation fallbacks, minimum source precision, bounds ignored outside the collected period, and invalid text with no handler as an error; describe date and datetime shifts, imputation flag codes, and partial text giving no date part
1.42026-10-15yamaa docs buildState datetime precision codes through the hour and minute, and complete only the time parts a collected datetime lacks
1.32026-09-29yamaa docs buildShow study codelist names, external dictionaries, and ISO 8601 formats in variable rows; list the document's codelist values and metadata
1.22026-09-29yamaa docs buildClassify ADaM copies from a declared input as Predecessor and recodes as Derived, and SDTM recodes of locally derived columns as Derived
1.12026-09-29yamaa docs buildResolve lookups into the donor record they select, and give every derivation shape a plain-language rule instead of its raw YAML
1.0yamaa docs buildInitial generation from spec.yaml