[EpiData-list] Testing of new features - example double entry

epidata-list at lists.umanitoba.ca epidata-list at lists.umanitoba.ca
Sat Jun 23 04:49:22 CDT 2012

As I have informed a number of times we are gradually implementing all 
features from Epidata Entry module over these years. In the 
implementation the idea is to mainly do the following:

a. Modernise all programming to a unified structure and programming 
principle, which also allows several operating systems.
b. To adhere to modern standards for the aspects implemented and to base 
all work on documentation of work and good documentation standards.
c. To stick to the principle of small and tight size without too many 
d. To change mode of working as little as possible in relation to 
previous practice.
e. To extend with principles needed for compliance with Good Clinical 
Practice guidelines including logging of all activity.

For the double-entry aspects as Torsten Christiansen wrote this is 
included in the current test release in the form where two separate 
files can be compared and differences will be indicated. We might 
implement later the other principle, where one gets information 
immediately if there is a change from first entry, but this is undecided 
at this point.

It is crucial that users spend some time in testing the new features and 
compare with the old EpiData entry function. Programming and handling 
data is a delicate matter where even small changes or mistakes can make 
a difference in correct behaviour.

In short: Please assist in commenting and challenging the functionality 
as we move along the development.

Bugs or errors should be reported to: http://www.epidata.info/flyspray/

General discussions should be taken on this list.


Jens Lauritsen
EpiData Association

More information about the EpiData-list mailing list