Conversation
Screening 200 auto-relevant candidates in a raw CSV is slow and error-prone. The review app is a single self-contained HTML file: cards with metadata, DOI link, and WASH search terms highlighted in title and abstract, keyboard-driven include/exclude with reasons, progress persisted in the browser's localStorage, and a CSV export of decisions. make_datapapers_review_app.R builds the app from the worklist and the committed template, dropping DOIs already decided in the screening sheet, so rebuilding after each applied batch yields the remaining queue. apply_datapapers_decisions.R merges the exported decisions into data-raw/datapapers_screening.csv keyed on DOI; the sheet stays the committed decision record. The committed datapapers_review.html is the instrument as last built (155 pending title-only candidates). Refs #28 Assisted-by: Claude claude-fable-5
The 45 auto-relevant candidates with an abstract were reviewed in the HTML review app: 8 included, 37 excluded, each with a reason. datapapers_decisions.csv is the app's export; the apply script merged it into the screening sheet keyed on DOI. The 155 title-only candidates were deliberately left unreviewed and stay include = NA in the sheet: pending rows are excluded from builds, and the sheet remains honest about what was never judged rather than recording blanket exclusions. Refs #28 Human-authored: true Assisted-by: Claude claude-fable-5
The 8 included papers become data/datapapers.rda plus the CSV/XLSX exports, processed by 03_datapapers_process.R from the committed screening sheet. One affiliation needed the country fixes sheet (Universidade Jean Piaget de Cabo Verde is Cabo Verde). All 8 rows have data_repo_url NA because the harvest carried no dataset-relation metadata; collecting those links from the papers is where issue #27 picks up. README.Rmd renders with all four datasets for the first time. The chunk renumbering orphaned the previous README figure PNGs, so the six stale ones are removed; the pkgdown docs/ site keeps its own copies until its next rebuild. devtools::check() passes with 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 notes. Closes #28 Assisted-by: Claude claude-fable-5
The generated datapapers_review.html is a build artifact: it embeds only the candidates still pending at build time, so it goes stale after every applied decision batch. Screening is done, and the file is rebuildable at any time from the committed template via make_datapapers_review_app.R, so the repo keeps the method and drops the artifact. Refs #28 Assisted-by: Claude claude-fable-5
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
Test plan