Survey & Assessment Publishing - Problems to solve for V1

Things to keep in mind:

1. There is no difference between a “survey” and an “assessment” as far as the Bridge services model is concerned. How it is handled depends on the platform:

   1. Researcher UI - “surveys” are local and “assessments” are shared

   2. Mobile device - use the assessment identifier to query loaded frameworks and then fallback to decoding the JSON config using AssessmentModelKMM (surveys)

2. In the Researcher UI

   1. “Survey Builder” = Local Assessments (app scoped)

   2. “Assessment Library” = Shared Assessments (all apps) - visible to a given app using a hardcoded list of tags

3. Assessment Components

   1. all assessments include

      1. model object service https://developer.sagebridge.org/model-browser.html#Assessment

      2. json config for every assessments. This is used by surveys to build and render specific to the assessment.

      3. complex json schema URL = schema for assessmentResult.json

      4. simplified json schema = schema for answers.json

   2. individual exported archive

      1. assessmentResult.json = with all data points collected, timing, processing path through client etc for one assessment

      2. answers.json = summarized results (KVP) assessment summary

      3. metadata.json = all the things

   3. aggregated results summary csv file = aggregated answers and metadata for all participants in study

      1. csv file generated using answers.json, simplified json schema, and metadata.json
         
         

Need: human-readable “assessment identifier” to include in the CSV file for surveys

The identifier field was originally designed to be human-readable, but it is scoped to the app-id so for surveys, the work-around was to make the identifier a read-only random 5-letter code so it wouldn't conflict. The identifier is also restricted as read-only once an assessment is created. Changing the identifier requires making a copy of the assessment.

Assessment Name + CSV

csv file study ID plus

Proposed fix:

1. CSV filename =studyID AND study name AND assessment ID and assessment name

Need: Redefine “publish” to mean “make the survey read-only”

Bridge 2.0 defines “publish” to mean moving the assessment from local app-scoped assessment to a shared assessment. Currently only Sage Bionetworks admins can do this.

Requirements:

1. The “publish” button in the Researcher UI needs to mark a survey as read-only somehow.

2. When transitioning a study from “design” to “recruitment”, any included local assessments would also need to be marked as “published” (if not already).

Proposed fixes:

1. Add a nullable publishedDate field to the Assessment model . If non-null then the given revision is read-only.

Need: Surveys need to be study and/or owner scoped rather than app id scoped

1. The “local” assessments are currently scoped to the app id and visible to all researchers

2. There is no defined UI/UX for how to schedule a local assessment (i.e. survey)

Note: A validated standard survey could be moved to the “Shared Assessments” library by a Sage admin.

Rules for scoping a survey are as-yet undefined. TODO: discuss on Wednesday, Sept. 27

Proposed fixes:

Continue to use Orgs to scope what is visible based on organization with rights to see all surveys constrained to the organization.

If survey is in draft form it will be editable until a study is launched into recruitment.