Gregory Steffens Novartis Associate Director, Programming NJ CDISC Users’ Group 17 April 2014 Supplemental Qualifiers.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
SDTM Implementation Guide Version 3.1.2
Advertisements

ADaM Implementation Guide: It’s Almost Here. Are You Ready?
Testing Relational Database
Copyright © 2013 Quintiles FA vs. SUPPQUAL Facilitator: Riekert Henning, 11 April 2013.
OpenCDISC Rules for Discussion
CDISC ADaM 2.1 Implementation: A Challenging Next Step in the Process Presented by Tineke Callant
Documentation and example Richard Senecal, Senior Principal Programmer NJ CDISC Users Group Merck/Summit, September 19, 2013 define.xml.v2 row-level metadata.
The Importance of CDASH
Chapter 2: Modularization
Quick tour of CDISC’s ADaM standard
SUPPQUAL – Where’s My Mommy? Sandra VanPelt Nguyen Midwest CDISC Users Group May 2012.
Gregory Steffens Associate Director, Programming Novartis Row – Level Metadata.
ADaM Standards Wouter van Wyk. Why ADaM –SDTM purpose is to provide collected data Not designed for ease of analysis –ADaM purpose is to provide data.
CDISC (CDASH/SDTM) integration into OC/RDC
SIM5102 Software Evaluation
© CDISC 2014 Asthma TAUG Metadata Bundle Review – Experimental Content PhUSE Computational Science Symposium March th, 2015 Sam Hume 1.
Metadata Management – Our Journey Thus Far
Synthesis of Incomplete and Qualified Data using the GCE Data Toolbox Wade Sheldon Georgia Coastal Ecosystems LTER University of Georgia.
Copyright © 2010, SAS Institute Inc. All rights reserved. Define.xml - Tips and Techniques for Creating CRT - DDS Julie Maddox Mark Lambrecht SAS Institute.
Monika Kawohl Statistical Programming Accovion GmbH Tutorial: define.xml.
Page 1 ISMT E-120 Desktop Applications for Managers Introduction to Microsoft Access.
Updates on CDISC Standards Validation
Beyond regulatory submission - Standards Metadata Management Kevin Lee CDISC NJ Meeting at 06/17/2015 We help our Clients deliver better outcomes, so.
23 August 2015Michael Knoessl1 PhUSE 2008 Manchester / Michael Knoessl Implementing CDISC at Boehringer Ingelheim.
CBER CDISC Test Submission Dieter Boß CSL Behring, Marburg 20-Mar-2012.
© 2011 Octagon Research Solutions, Inc. All Rights Reserved. The contents of this document are confidential and proprietary to Octagon Research Solutions,
PhUSE SDE, 28-May A SAS based Solution for define.xml Monika Kawohl Statistical Programming Accovion.
Software Reuse Course: # The Johns-Hopkins University Montgomery County Campus Fall 2004 Session 6 Lecture # 5 – October 12, 2004.
Implementation of a harmonized, report-friendly SDTM and ADaM Data Flow General by Marie-Rose Peltier Experience by Marie Fournier Groupe Utilisateurs.
Vertex and CDISC / MBC / 12March Vertex and CDISC Accomplishments and Strategy 12 March 2008 Lynn Anderson Associate Director Statistical Programming/Biometrics.
ODM-SDTM mapping Nicolas de Saint Jorre, XClinical June 20, 2008 French CDISC User Group Bagneux/Paris © CDISC & XClinical, 2008.
Antje Rossmanith, Roche 14th German CDISC User Group, 25-Sep-2012
1CDISC 2002 RCRIM – Standard Domains Agenda NCI Presentation Standard Domains Working Group Goals Introduction to FDA Information Model (FIM) Discussion:
Overview and feed-back from CDISC European Interchange 2008 (From April 21 st to 25 th, COPENHAGEN) Groupe des Utilisateurs Francophones de CDISC Bagneux.
Confidential - Property of Navitas Accelerate define.xml using defineReady - Saravanan June 17, 2015.
Update on SDTMIG v and SDTM v. 1.2 Bay Area User Group Meeting May 2008 Fred Wood Octagon Research Solutions.
Entities & Attributes Overview By the end of this section participants will be able to discuss the main components of Section 5, and be able to incorporate.
How to go from an SDTM Finding Domain to an ADaM-Compliant Basic Data Structure Analysis Dataset: An Example Qian Wang, MSD, Brussels, Belgium Carl Herremans,
SDTM Validation Delaware Valley CDISC user network Ketan Durve Johnson and Johnson Pharmaceutical Reasearch and Development May 11 th 2009.
© MIT 2000 Building Web Applications With Webjects Michael D. Barker The MIT Educational Media Creation Center September 2001.
Research based, people driven CDISC ADaM Datasets - from SDTM to submission CDISC Experience Exchange and ADaM Workshop 15 Dec 2008 Zoë Williams, LEO Pharma.
1 © Prentice Hall, 2002 Chapter 5: Logical Database Design and the Relational Model Modern Database Management 6 th Edition Jeffrey A. Hoffer, Mary B.
Preventing Wide and Heavy ADs Dirk Van Krunckelsven Phuse 2011, Brighton ADaM on a Diet.
The Use of Metadata in Creating, Transforming and Transporting Clinical Data Gregory Steffens Director, Data Management and SAS Programming ICON Development.
CS 350: Introduction to Software Engineering Slide Set 2 Process Measurement C. M. Overstreet Old Dominion University Fall 2005.
Research Study Data Standards Standards for research study data for submission to regulatory authorities Standard development divided into three parts:
GEM METADATA DEVELOPMENT Xiaoping Wang, Macrosearch Allen Macklin, PMEL and Bernard Megrey, AFSC.
1 Much ADaM about Nothing – a PROC Away in a Day EndriPhUSE Conference Rowland HaleBrighton (UK), 9th - 12th October 2011.
Refined Online Citation Matching and Adaptive Canonical Metadata Construction CSE 598B Course Project Report Huajing Li.
April ADaM define.xml - Metadata Design Analysis Results Metadata List of key analyses (as defined in change order) Analysis Results Metadata per.
How good is your SEND data? Timothy Kropp FDA/CDER/OCS 1.
How Good is Your SDTM Data? Perspectives from JumpStart Mary Doi, M.D., M.S. Office of Computational Science Office of Translational Sciences Center for.
Online Information and Education Conference 2004, Bangkok Dr. Britta Woldering, German National Library Metadata development in The European Library.
Generation of real-time SDTM datasets and metadata through a generic SDTM converter mechanism CDISC (CDASH/SDTM) integration into OC/RDC Peter Van Reusel.
Most Common Issues in Define.xml files
Licenses & Prevailing Terms Updated: 18-Jun-2006.
CDISC submission standard
A need for prescriptive define.xml
Monika Kawohl Statistical Programming Accovion GmbH
Greg Steffens Noumena Solutions
Updates on CDISC Standards Validation
Accelerate define.xml using defineReady - Saravanan June 17, 2015.
Secondary Uses Primary Use EHR and other Auhortities Clinical Trial
Beyond regulatory submission - Standards Metadata Management Kevin Lee CDISC NJ Meeting at 06/17/2015 We help our Clients deliver better outcomes, so.
Entity Based Staging SQL Server 2012 Tyler Graham
Some ways to encourage quality programming
Traceability between SDTM and ADaM converted analysis datasets
To change this title, go to Notes Master
define.xml.v2 row-level metadata
PhilaSUG Spring Meeting June 05, 2019
Presentation transcript:

Gregory Steffens Novartis Associate Director, Programming NJ CDISC Users’ Group 17 April 2014 Supplemental Qualifiers

Supplemental Qualifiers Defined | Presentation Title | Presenter Name | Date | Subject | Business Use Only2  “The SDTM does not allow the addition of new variables. Therefore, the Supplemental Qualifiers special purpose dataset model is used to capture non-standard variables and their association to parent records in general- observation-class datasets”  “SUPP-- datasets are also used to capture attributions. An attribution is typically an interpretation or subjective classification of one or more observations by a specific evaluator, such as a population flag that classifies a subject or their data according to their evaluability for efficacy analysis, or whether an observation is considered to be clinically significant.”

Supplemental Qualifier Domain Structure | Presentation Title | Presenter Name | Date | Subject | Business Use Only3 Variable NameVariable Label STUDYID Study Identifier RDOMAIN Related Domain Abbreviation USUBJID Unique Subject Identifier IDVAR Identifying Variable IDVARVAL Identifying Variable Value QNAM Qualifier Variable Name QLABEL Qualifier Variable Label QVAL Qualifier Variable Value (must not be null) QORIGOrigin QEVALEvaluator

What We Need to Do | Presentation Title | Presenter Name | Date | Subject | Business Use Only4  Describe the supplemental qualifier elements in metadata and submit the define file  Describe the supplemental qualifier domains in metadata and submit the define file  Create parent and supplemental qualifier study data sets  Some people create and maintain these manually, defining each individual SUPP– domain  But...

A Better Way to Do It | Presentation Title | Presenter Name | Date | Subject | Business Use Only5  Metadata Define the suppqual element in its parent domain Include a suppqual flag variable in your element-level metadata Create a software module that generates metadata which describes the suppqual domain and suppqual elements from that simple suppqual flag  Study Data Create two software modules that move suppqual elements between the study parent domain and the study SUPP– domain

Why Better for Metadata? | Presentation Title | Presenter Name | Date | Subject | Business Use Only6  SUPP– is a combination of study data and metadata. It’s better to put metadata information in metadata and study information in study data. Also SUPP-- metadata is very limited to QLABEL and QORIGIN.  Defining a suppqual flag in your element-level metadata enables full definition of suppqual elements, with all the metadata attributes. The simple flag enables generation of VLM metadata to define v2 to describe SUPP--.  Higher quality definition of SUPP– domains because they are programmatically generated, no more need to remember the many details of the SUPP– domain when you have a new one to define. Maintenance is much easier to add and delete suppqual elements.

Suppquals in Study Data | Presentation Title | Presenter Name | Date | Subject | Business Use Only7  A suppqual_make software module can move elements from a parent domain to its SUPP– domain  A suppqual_get software module can move elements from a SUPP– domain to its parent domain  The suppqual elements can be created in the parent domain, just like any other element. The suppqual_make module will then move them to the SUPP– domain automatically.  When generating TLFs that require suppqual elements, the suppqual_get module can be called to move the suppqual elements from the SUPP– to the parent domain

%suppqual_make( inlib=work,mdlib=md,mdprefix=sdtm_,outlib=sdtm) %suppqual_get( inlib=sdtm,mdlib=md,mdprefix=sdtm,outlib=work) | Presentation Title | Presenter Name | Date | Subject | Business Use Only8 Example Calls to the SUPP macros

Why Better for Study Data? | Presentation Title | Presenter Name | Date | Subject | Business Use Only9  Reusable code is usually better, but especially in this kind of case that is both mechanical and complex  TLFs can be generated from pure SDTM, no need for SDTM plus, minus, etc. Just call suppqual_get and start your TLF program code  No need to submit a different database to the FDA (SDTM) than you actually used in the TLF programming (SDTM+). Much more transparent and less room for error.

An Even Better Way | Presentation Title | Presenter Name | Date | Subject | Business Use Only10 Do Away with the Problem  Remove the SUPP– domains from all the CDISC data standards  Replace these with a suppqual flag attribute in the ItemRef element of the define.xml file  Add suppqual elements “to the right” in the parent study data domain  Systems which cannot handle suppqual elements can ignore them based on the flags in the metadata  No more need to move data between parent and SUPP– domains  No more need to generate SUPP– domain descriptions in metadata  No more need to submit different data structures to the FDA than you actually generated TLFs from

Row-Level Suppquals? | Presentation Title | Presenter Name | Date | Subject | Business Use Only11  Do suppqual elements exist in tall-thin, vertical study data sets?  The tall-thin study data sets contain “virtual elements” whose names are in TESTCD and values are in ORRES.  If there are suppquals in short-wide, horizontal study data sets, why can’t there be suppquals in tall-thin, vertical study data sets? TESTCD values that fall outside the controlled terminology.  These require additional metadata, than exists in the define.xml file now.