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: build one analysis record per collected adverse event, carrying ASEV and adding SEVTOT.

Input: collected adverse events with the severity word recorded in AESEV.

Variables:

  • ASEV would contain the severity word reported for the event, carried unchanged from the collected severity.
  • SEVTOT would be the subject's total severity burden, totalling the severity across all of their reported events and repeated on each of their event records.

Note: severity is recorded as words, and words have no total. Ordering the words and totalling their positions would be a real rule, but it is a different one, and the request never states the numbers it would use. The run is rejected before any data is read, so no artifact is accepted.

How to fix

Declare the study's numeric severity scale first, then total that numeric column:

- name: ASEVN
  type: int
  derivation:
    mapping:
      source: ASEV
      dict:
        MILD: 1
        MODERATE: 2
        SEVERE: 3

- name: SEVTOT
  type: int
  derivation:
    aggregate:
      group_by: [STUDYID, USUBJID]
      expr: "SUM(ASEVN)"

Keep the intermediate numeric column out of the artifact by leaving it off the artifact column list. The numeric assignments are analysis policy and must be confirmed rather than inferred from the order of the words.

Expected failure

Edit
the run is rejected; no artifact is accepted
expected/error.yaml
phase
validation
condition
incompatible_input_type
requirement
REQ-0510
expected/error.yaml
phase: validation
condition: incompatible_input_type
spec_paths:
  - columns.SEVTOT.derivation.aggregate.expr
requirement: REQ-0510
context:
  source: ASEV
  expected: numeric
  actual: str

Inputs

Under review
1 source file

input/ae.csv

Edit
2 rows
input/ae.csv
STUDYIDUSUBJIDAESEQAETERMAESEV
PILOT71NauseaMILD
PILOT72FatigueSEVERE

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
ADAEASEVAnalysis Severity/IntensitycharacterCopy value from AE.AESEV.Predecessor
ADAESEVTOTTotal Severity ScorenumericAggregate SUM(ASEV) over records grouped by STUDYID, USUBJID, matching on the shared output keys.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