Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

documentation update #243

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jun 7, 2024
Merged

documentation update #243

merged 2 commits into from
Jun 7, 2024

Conversation

ginberg
Copy link
Collaborator

@ginberg ginberg commented Apr 16, 2024

see #229

@ginberg
Copy link
Collaborator Author

ginberg commented Apr 16, 2024

@anthonysena do you think this is enough with regard to updating the documentation or should we describe it somewhere else as well?

@ginberg ginberg requested a review from anthonysena April 16, 2024 19:10
Copy link
Collaborator

@anthonysena anthonysena left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

From our discussion let's revise this and link back to the original issue so people can get more details as required.

@@ -58,7 +58,8 @@
#' @param covariateSettings Either an object of type \code{covariateSettings} as created using one
#' of the createCovariate functions, or a list of such objects.
#' @param aggregated Should aggregate statistics be computed instead of covariates per
#' cohort entry?
#' cohort entry? If aggregated is set to FALSE, the cohort table should contain unique records
#' per patient and per cohort. Otherwise there will be collisions and the output is ambiguous.
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If aggregated is set to FALSE, the cohort table should contain unique records per patient and per cohort. Otherwise there will be collisions and the output is ambiguous.

If aggregated is set to FALSE, the results returned will be based on each subject_id and cohort_start_date in your cohort table. If your cohort contains multiple entries for the same subject_id (due to different cohort_start_date values), you must carefully set the rowIdField so you can identify the patients properly See Issue #229 for more discussion on this parameter.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

hi @anthonysena I have updated the documentation to the text above

Merge branch 'develop' into issue229

# Conflicts:
#	R/GetCovariates.R
@ginberg ginberg added this to the v3.6.0 milestone Apr 24, 2024
@ginberg ginberg requested a review from anthonysena May 21, 2024 11:47
@anthonysena anthonysena removed this from the v3.6.0 milestone Jun 7, 2024
@anthonysena anthonysena merged commit 63bd453 into develop Jun 7, 2024
8 checks passed
@anthonysena anthonysena deleted the issue229 branch June 7, 2024 13:43
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Inconsistent Handling of cohortIds in getDbCovariateData Depending on aggregated Setting
2 participants