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: draftEditUnder review
What this benchmark means
README.md

Goal: report whether the first treatment start (TRTSTPR) included a collected time.

Input: exposure records carrying a collected start date or date/time.

Variables:

  • TRTSTPR: S when the exposure start included a time and D when it was a complete date with no time. A start collected to the year and month only is neither a complete date nor a moment, so it cannot answer whether only the time is absent; the run stops rather than reporting a misleading precision.

How to fix

Recover the exposure day upstream when it was collected. If a date-imputation policy applies, complete the date separately before asking datetime_precision whether the resulting source carried a time.

Expected failure

Edit
the run is rejected; no artifact is accepted
expected/error.yaml
phase
impute
condition
invalid_datetime_text
requirement
REQ-1183
expected/error.yaml
phase: impute
condition: invalid_datetime_text
spec_paths:
  - columns.TRTSTPR.derivation.datetime_precision
requirement: REQ-1183
context:
  source: EX.EXSTDTC
  value: 2025-01
  keys:
    - STUDYID: YAMAA-01
      USUBJID: YAMAA-01-101
      EXSEQ: 1

Inputs

Under review
1 source file

input/ex.csv

Edit
3 rows
input/ex.csv
STUDYIDUSUBJIDEXSEQEXSTDTC
YAMAA-0112025-01
YAMAA-0122025-01-15T09:30:00
YAMAA-0132025-01-15

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
ADSLSTUDYIDStudy IdentifiercharacterCopy value from EX.STUDYID.Predecessor
ADSLUSUBJIDUnique Subject IdentifiercharacterCopy value from EX.USUBJID.Predecessor
ADSLEXSEQSequence NumbernumericCopy value from EX.EXSEQ.Predecessor
ADSLTRTSTPRFirst Exposure Date/Time Collected PrecisioncharacterCollected datetime precision of EX.EXSTDTC: D for a complete date, M for year and month, Y for a year alone.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