Versions Compared

Old Version 61

changes.mady.by.user Jordan Li

Saved on

compared with

New Version 62

changes.mady.by.user Jordan Li

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.
  •  Fill in results and units for rows 6 and 7
  •  Fill in PKCOND values for rows 6 and 7
  •  ANMETH is a "record qualifier" according to Model 2.0 so technically we don't need to add the METHOD variable into PP. There would only be one valid value of PPMETHOD anyway = CALCULATION. (Confirm with Fred)
    •  Rows 4-5 can the values in PPANMETH also in PPCAT? (Because PPCAT is blank)
    •  Should ANMETH be only used for named formulas like how LB is using it?
  •  Remove PPMETHOD from PP specification table if decided not needed.
  •  Review suppPP dataset makes sure it looks ok
  •  Do people use PC/PP domain for compartmental analysis data as well? For CT we don’t control none-NCA values, but that’s CT ONLY, on the domain level, do people use PC/PP for None-NCA data anyway? The new term request from GSK asked for a controlled codelist for PKANMETH but the requested value is actually for compartmental analysis – this suggests to me that folks are using PC/PP for compartmental analysis data. Currently the SDTMIG does not explicitly state that users should only represent NCA data in PC/PP. Better understanding this would help to decide whether we should add ANMETH into PP.

...