closes #2389 removed the typo in an example for derive_vars_locf_records

[janardhanswami]

Thank you for your Pull Request! We have developed this task checklist from the Development Process Guide to help with the final steps of the process. Completing the below tasks helps to ensure our reviewers can maximize their time on your code as well as making sure the admiral codebase remains robust and consistent.

Please check off each taskbox as an acknowledgment that you completed the task or check off that it is not relevant to your Pull Request. This checklist is part of the Github Action workflows and the Pull Request will not be merged into the main branch until you have checked off each task.

• [x] Place Closes # into the beginning of your Pull Request Title (Use Edit button in top-right if you need to update)
• [ ] Code is formatted according to the tidyverse style guide. Run styler::style_file() to style R and Rmd files
• [ ] Updated relevant unit tests or have written new unit tests, which should consider realistic data scenarios and edge cases, e.g. empty datasets, errors, boundary cases etc. - See Unit Test Guide
• [ ] If you removed/replaced any function and/or function parameters, did you fully follow the deprecation guidance?
• [x] Review the Cheat Sheet. Make any required updates to it by editing the file inst/cheatsheet/admiral_cheatsheet.pptx and re-upload a PDF version of it to the same folder.
• [ ] Update to all relevant roxygen headers and examples, including keywords and families. Refer to the categorization of functions to tag appropriate keyword/family.
• [x] Run devtools::document() so all .Rd files in the man folder and the NAMESPACE file in the project root are updated appropriately
• [x] Address any updates needed for vignettes and/or templates
• [x] Update NEWS.md under the header # admiral (development version) if the changes pertain to a user-facing function (i.e. it has an @export tag) or documentation aimed at users (rather than developers)
• [x] Build admiral site pkgdown::build_site() and check that all affected examples are displayed correctly and that all new functions occur on the "Reference" page.
• [x] Address or fix all lintr warnings and errors - lintr::lint_package()
• [x] Run R CMD check locally and address all errors and warnings - devtools::check()
• [x] Link the issue in the Development Section on the right hand side.
• [x] Address all merge conflicts and resolve appropriately
• [x] Pat yourself on the back for a job well done! Much love to your accomplishment!

[manciniedoardo]

I am wondering if there should be a check that makes sure the AVISIT/N are mapped 1-1? @pharmaverse/admiral WDYT?

I think it's a good idea - where do you suggest it runs though? because if we made it its own function we'd have to add it everywhere.

[bms63]

I am wondering if there should be a check that makes sure the AVISIT/N are mapped 1-1? @pharmaverse/admiral WDYT?

I think it's a good idea - where do you suggest it runs though? because if we made it its own function we'd have to add it everywhere.

I think it would need to be optional?? I think we do something similar in some of the lab-focused functions with param/cd checks. I'm not sure where it would be called...

[manciniedoardo]

I am wondering if there should be a check that makes sure the AVISIT/N are mapped 1-1? @pharmaverse/admiral WDYT?

I think it's a good idea - where do you suggest it runs though? because if we made it its own function we'd have to add it everywhere.

I think it would need to be optional?? I think we do something similar in some of the lab-focused functions with param/cd checks. I'm not sure where it would be called...

agree, maybe it could be a function within admiraldev?

[millerg23]

There is an assertion in admiraldev called assert_one_to_one() that is used in derive_param_tte() for example.

[janardhanswami]

Just wanted to know is there anything that need's to be done from my side? @bms63

[bms63]

@janardhanswami nothing needs to be done from your side. apologies that your PR got hijacked for our discussion, but raises a good point.

The failing checks are un-related. I will fix those for you.

[janardhanswami]

@bms63 Just wanted to know do we have any function or method so that we can check 1-1 mapping between certain variables like AVISIT and AVISITN, PARAM and PARAMCD, APERIOD and APERIODN, TRTP and TRTPN, TRTA and TRTAN. If we didn't have any function can we add one to check if the dataset follow the 1-1 relation between certain variables if it doesn't follow 1-1 relation then we can warn them by displaying a warning?

[bms63]

Hi @janardhanswami yes we have some of this capability built in to some functions using this - https://github.com/pharmaverse/admiraldev/blob/8a2b3d8de3d6b4b9122d4517f3a8f86bb4662ea9/R/assertions.R#L1558

I'm thinking that this function does not have this baked in.

[github-actions[bot]]

Package	Line Rate	Health
admiral	98%	✔
Summary	98% (4730 / 4818)	✔

[manciniedoardo]

Hello @janardhanswami - thanks for your PR! If you like, I can include you in the admiral acknowledgements. If so can I have your full name please?

[janardhanswami]

Hi @manciniedoardo I would love to see my name on the admiral acknowledgements my full name is saijanardhanswami. Thanks for recognizing my small efforts it boosts me a lot to even work more like this :) if possible please share me the link for that acknowledgement page or let me know where I can see that.

[manciniedoardo]

Hi @manciniedoardo I would love to see my name on the admiral acknowledgements my full name is saijanardhanswami. Thanks for recognizing my small efforts it boosts me a lot to even work more like this :) if possible please share me the link for that acknowledgement page or let me know where I can see that.

Great to hear! I will add something for Saijanard Hanswami in our June update. Please correct me if I got the spacing wrong.

[janardhanswami]

Hey @manciniedoardo actually the spacing is wrong it should be like this Sai Janardhanswami
Thanks :)

[manciniedoardo]

@janardhanswami great! thanks