Review ask

As a clinical trial statistician or programmer, challenge anything in this benchmark: describe a problem in Comments, or propose a fix with the Edit button on any source file.

  1. Task: Is this a specification error a study team could realistically make, and should the build stop on it rather than continue?
  2. Inputs: Do they trigger the failure for the reason the summary gives?
  3. Expected failure: Is this the right error, raised at the right point, and would it tell the programmer what to fix?

The other tabs beside Comments are background for assessment, not under review.

Summary

Lifecycle: reviewedEditUnder review
What this benchmark means
README.md

Goal: one analysis row for each adverse event carrying the analysis start (ASTDT) and a second analysis start (ASTDT2).

Input: collected adverse event records carrying the reported start (AESTDTC).

Variables:

  • ASTDT would contain the analysis start date taken from the reported start.
  • ASTDT2 would be the calendar date taken from the analysis start, but taking a calendar date needs a date-time value or date text while the analysis start is already a date, so the run is rejected before any data is read and no artifact is accepted.

How to fix

Use the date directly (derivation: ASTDT). When the source is a datetime, extract its calendar date explicitly:

- name: ASTDT2
  type: date
  derivation:
    to_date: {source: ASTDTM}

Expected failure

Edit
the run is rejected; no artifact is accepted
expected/error.yaml
phase
validation
condition
incompatible_input_type
requirement
REQ-0607
expected/error.yaml
phase: validation
condition: incompatible_input_type
spec_paths:
  - columns.ASTDT2.derivation.to_date.source
requirement: REQ-0607
context:
  source: ASTDT
  expected: datetime, ISO date text, or ISO 8601 datetime text
  actual: date

Inputs

Under review
1 source file

input/ae.csv

Edit
1 row
input/ae.csv
STUDYIDUSUBJIDAESEQAESTDTC
YAMAA-0112025-01-15

Unexpected Output

Under review
No artifact is produced

No fixture files in this directory.

Shaded columns are derived— = missing value

Comments and assessment materials

Comments

Signed in with GitHub; saved in repository Discussions

Mapping spec

Generated from the benchmark YAML; do not edit by hand

Dataset NameVariable NameVariable LabelTypeCodelist/Controlled TermsCoreComputational MethodOrigin
ADAESTUDYIDStudy IdentifiercharacterCopy value from AE.STUDYID.Predecessor
ADAEUSUBJIDUnique Subject IdentifiercharacterCopy value from AE.USUBJID.Predecessor
ADAEAESEQSequence NumbernumericCopy value from AE.AESEQ.Predecessor
ADAEASTDTAnalysis Start DatenumericISO 8601Copy value from AE.AESTDTC.Predecessor
ADAEASTDT2Analysis Start Date from DatetimenumericISO 8601Take the date part of ASTDT.Derived
VersionDateAuthorDescriptionReviewerSign-off
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