• FEATURES
  • PRICING
  • MARKETPLACE
  • CASE STUDIES
  • BLOG
    •

    Can these fields be removed from Collection Protocol?

    OS v20 Features
    #1

    During collection protocol creation, there are few fields which are rarely used. We plan to remove them unless someone things its important:

    1. Description URL - Link to an external site where more details about the protocol maybe defined
    2. Consent Waived - yes/no
    3. Aliquots in same container - Flag set at protocol level to decide if aliquots created under this protocol should be placed in same box. We can instead make this better at the aliquot creation page to give options to show box which can hold all aliquots.
    4. Clinical diagnosis subset at protocol level and default at event level - This is to set a few values from the whole list of clinical diagnosis which are appropriate for the collection protocol. If the system allows to type and see only matching list(auto complete drop down), this feature is not very useful.

    Please let us know your feedback.

    Thanks,
    Poornima

    #2

    Hi @pgovindrao,
    Some feedback:

    1. This is a seldom-used feature, though it might be helpful to use for specimen requests. For example, if a study is posted on clinicaltrials.gov (or somewhere similar), a URL to the study might serve as a link to a helpful description to the requesting party.
    2. Consents for studies at JHU are not stored in OpenSpecimen and this feature has not been used.
    3. The proposed change seems like an improvement in usability.
    4. Would it be possible to support multi-select for clinical diagnosis? Are there any other groups that would find multi-select useful?

    To add to this list, we have not used the “Offset” field present at the event level. Are there any groups that do use this field? Could anyone describe how this field is intended to be used?

    #3
    1. I second Matt’s point here. We do not commonly use this field, however all of our clinical trial documents are listed on the CTSU and/or Alliance websites. Users do need an account to access most of this information but it could prove useful in some circumstances. We have not yet started to use this feature however.
    2. Consents for our Alliance trials are also not stored in our current CaTissue 2.0 version, and will not be stored in OpenSpecimen either, so I’m no help for this issue.
    3. Agree with Matt.
    4. Usually the diagnosis for all specimen collected under one protocol will, or should, be the same for all specimens. For our trials, once this is set up in the database, we do not change this on a per specimen basis. However, I do agree that it may help to have a multi-select function as some of our protocols have 2 or 3 diagnosis options. It could prove helpful in maintaining accuracy per trial.

    To answer Matt’s additional question, we are still in CaTissue 2.0 and have not yet tested or used OpenSpecimen. So I’m unaware of this field however will provide feedback once we’ve tested.

    Best, Rachel

    #4

    Thanks for your inputs @Rachel_Jewell & @Matthew_Marcetich.

    We will make a note to have multi-select option for clinical diagnosis at visit level as this is something many users have asked for.

    About offset field, it was added to help track if there was delays or changes in collection time point as opposed to what is defined in study. Since it was not used, we have removed it in OpenSpecimen.

    Thanks,
    Poornima

    #5
    1. I agree with Matt. We do not use this field currently but that does not mean users do not want it.
    2. We do have several protocols that track patient consent in OpenSpecimen. I think as more and more labs become responsible for insuring the specimens they have been obtained under proper consent, the consent features will be used more. I have really never understood the Consent Waived question on the CP creation page. Again have consent waived specimens I think is going to become a thing of the past as biobanking grows and more regulations are put into place.
    3. Agree with Matt
    4. This is actually used at Wash U. For example there is a study that captures more granular Dx for leukemia then just AML. It is very helpful to the staff to have the subset of DXs to select from and it ensures consistence in the DX selected. If I want to record the Dx of Acute Myeloid Leukemia there are several choices to select from and then you also have [M]Acute Myeloid Leukemia different staff members the are not sure which to select. By having the subset of Dx to select from it will speed up the process for the staff and ensure consistence.