Closed lwaldron closed 1 year ago
It looks like for "Confounders controlled for" (and "Matched on" as well), we are using the same allowed values as in the "Condition" field, which is the cause of the problem. Is it desired for these three fields to use the same list? If so, we'll need to figure out a workaround for this issue. Please advise.
"Confounders controlled for" "Matched on" could use the EFO ontology as well, but there are also arguments for treating these two differently than Condition and using instead a manual list for these:
However, I can't think of any argument on the user side for "Confounders controlled for" and "Matched on" not using the same list as each other.
Got it. I'll follow up about this.
Please see the way we clarified this on the Admin help page. We're also going to improve the warning tooltip.
This is all ready for review.
New tooltip:
Clicking "Confounders controlled for" brings the user to the new version of the Property page:
Clicking "Edit list" brings up this interface, with some useful notices:
This looks good!
In https://bugsigdb.org/Study_144/Experiment_1 the "Confounders controlled for" contains "peak expiratory flow", which is a valid EFO term) but is being flagged as invalid. There are also other pages containing values that are not EFO terms, but which nonetheless would be nice to allow, to clear the processing errors while requiring consistent use of that term.
Note, there is conflicting documentation about allowed terms:
https://bugsigdb.org/Help:Admin links to here which looks like:![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/639942/223449797-7e6fac5b-3968-437c-acba-bd4b0cb7a394.png)
And the warning tooltip links to https://bugsigdb.org/Property:Allows_value which links to https://bugsigdb.org/Property:Confounders_controlled_for, which is not an editable list (contains code
{{Set validation}}
)