Other Tips
- Applying branching logic to an existing field where data is already stored may prompt users to erase values that were previously entered and saved during data entry.
- New fields held in draft mode cannot be embedded elsewhere on the form or survey to which the new fields are being. To embed new fields, first add new fields to a form or survey and submit the changes, and then, go back into Draft Mode and apply field embedding.
Best Practices
- Before submitting changes, review the change details for critical issues, and whenever possible, make additional modifications to eliminate the issues based on the tips described above.
- To learn how to review the change details and see the most common types of critical issues and how they can be resolved, watch the video linked to in the call out box on the right and download the accompanying slide deck
- Consolidate change submissions using the following guidelines:
- Submit in a single batch all the changes that will get automatically approved.
- Submit in a single batch any changes will have critical issues that may result in a data loss or data corruption.
- Before submitting changes, review the change details for critical issues, and whenever possible, make additional modifications to eliminate the issues based on the tips described above.
- Moving an existing field to a new form that needs to be enabled as repeating instrument may cause unintended behavior.
- If adding more than one new form, separate each form into its own change submission.
- Consolidate change submissions using the following guidelines:
- Submit in a single batch all the changes for new forms without critical issues that will get automatically approved.
- Submit in a single batch any changes for new forms with critical issues that may result in a data loss or data corruption.
- If the new form needs to be added to an event or enabled as repeating instrument, download the instrument zip and upload it into the test project for testing. For more information on downloading and uploading instrument zips, review the section, Other Functionality Related to Copying on the Copy Project or Project Entities page.
If there are barriers to making changes to the events the email will include the REDCap Team's recommendations for how to move forward with an alternate solution. In these situations, it's not unusual if additional help or instruction is required to implement the alternate solution.
If additional help is needed, the email will include information about the next steps, which will involve meeting outside drop-in to create an estimate for the REDCap Team's help.
Ultimately, even when the REDCap Team is providing additional help, it is the responsibility of the builder/point person to evaluate the impact of their event changes on: 1) the data that's already been collected, 2) the data collection workflow and the functionality that facilitates it, and 3) the components of peripheral features the project team relies on for managing data collection.
Change Tips & Best Practices
Typically, the biggest risks in making changes to events involve the following:
- Removing an event or removing a form from an event, which will orphan off data that's already been collected and create a data loss.
- Renaming an event or editing an existing form to event assignment in order to move a form from one event to another event, which will cause any dependent logic statements or syntactical references that invoke the event name in calculated fields, piping, branching logic, report filters, automated survey invitations, survey queue connections, etc., to fail.
For these types for changes we recommend the following alternate solutions:
- Instead of removing an event, we recommend using the Form Display Logic tool to create conditional logic to disable data entry access to the forms assigned to the event you want to remove.
- Instead of removing a form from an event, we recommend using the Form Display Logic tool to create conditional logic to disable data entry access to the form at the event you want to remove the form from.
- Instead of editing an existing form to event assignment in order to move a form from one event to another event, we recommend using the Form Display Logic tool to create conditional logic to disable data entry access to the form at the event you want to move the form from.
- Instead of renaming an event, we recommend you create a Custom Event Label to add a short helpful note or alternate name that will be meaningful to other users on the project.
For projects using surveys, making any changes to events heightens the risk of having a negative impact on the project and/or creating complexity that would require additional help because: 1) there are likely dependencies on features that are related to sending out surveys and collecting responses, such as Automated Survey Invitations, Survey Settings or the Survey Queue, all of which have their own learning curves, and 2) there is often a different effect of the changes on existing participants versus new participants that has to be accounted for.
Additionally, there could be charges ($) for the REDCap Team's help to fix changes related to ASI's, the Queue or Survey settings that were not first tested in a test copy of the project and/or for which the project builder/point person did not seek drop-in support.
Ultimately, even when the REDCap Team is providing additional help, it is the responsibility of the builder/point person to evaluate the impact of their changes related to ASIs, the Survey Queue or Survey Settings on: 1) the data that's already been collected, 2) the data collection workflow, including how the project is set up to send out surveys and collect responses, 3) the existing functionality that was tested and vetted during the development phase that impacts or is related to sending out surveys and collecting responses, and 4) the components of peripheral features the project team relies on for managing sending out surveys and collecting responses.
Change Tips & Best Practices
The only guardrail built into the system to try to prevent users from making the kinds of changes related to ASIs, the Queue, or Survey Settings, which risk having a negative impact on the project, is secondhand, via the careful application of User Rights.
- Restrict which users are assigned permissions to both Project Design and Setup user rights and Survey Distribution user rights.
- Ensure any user who is assigned permissions to both Project Design and Setup user rights and Survey Distribution user rights, have completed our Basics and Survey trainings.
The REDCap Team can be a helpful guardrail and sounding board for project builders/point persons who email us and/or come to a drop-in sessions to talk through their plans for making changes related to ASIs, the Queue, or Survey Settings. For these kinds of production changes, we provide for the builder/point person the same kind of drop-in and email support that we provide during the development phase of the project.
ASI Change Tips
The ASI Tips page in the Survey Projects section covers topics, such as canceling or rescheduling an ASI, as well as modifying or deactivating an ASI.
Help & Support
Typically, modifications to a project's main settings, or for the use of optional modules, are considered to be high impact and/or support-intensive types of changes that will require additional help from the REDCap Team, and for which there are charges ($). See the call out box at the top of the page, When Charges Apply ($). This is because these types of changes are:
Inherently riskier (read more about change risk assessments in section above that covers general considerations for help and support);
Often introduce unforeseen issues the project team didn't plan for;
May have regulatory implications that require additional analysis;
Demand technical expertise for testing and implementation.
There are a few modules, listed below, where changes can usually be managed by the project builder/point person first testing the changes in a test copy of their production project and then signing up for a drop-in for the REDCap Team's help with implementation.
Enabling repeating forms or events.
Enabling or disabling auto-numbering for records.
Occasionally, due to the complexity or breadth of a project, and/or because of the main project settings or optional modules involved, the changes the builder/point person is requesting cannot be accommodated in the existing production project. These situations will likely involve a design consultation or custom support to explore alternate solutions, which most often involve starting over in a new version of the project.
Lastly, as a general rule the REDCap Team doesn't disable or deactivate settings related to a project's main settings or to discontinue the use of an optional module, and there are special considerations when we do. See the section below, Deleting Fields, Forms, Events or Disabling a Main Project Setting or Optional Module.
Ultimately, even when the REDCap Team is providing additional help, it is the responsibility of the builder/point person to evaluate the impact of their changes on: 1) the data that's already been collected, 2) the data collection workflow and the functionality that facilitates it, and 3) the components of peripheral features the project team relies on for managing data collection.
The REDCap Team provides instruction and guidance for making e-consent revisions via the wiki instructions, through the video that is linked to in the call out box above, by answering follow up questions over email or at a drop-in session, and through supporting the project builder/point person to test or practice making revisions to their e-consent survey/form in a test copy of their project, which can be helpful for all builders/point persons, but is highly recommended for builders/point persons who are making revisions to an e-consent survey/form for the first time.
Additionally, when a project builder/point person submits an e-consent revision with the kinds of critical issues that could result in data loss or data corruption, the REDCap Team will reject the changes, and notify the builder/point person.
Outside of these activities, the REDCap Team is not involved in making e-consent revisions unless, additional help is needed, for which there would be charges, for the following kinds of activities.
- Prior to submitting their changes, the builder/point person would like the REDCap Team to review their revisions to check for issues, such as if they applied the versioning technique correctly, or validate the changes against the paper form(s) approved by the IRB.
- The builder/point person would like additional coaching or instruction for making e-consent revisions in the context of their project and their e-consent survey/form.
- Intervention is required to address e-consent revisions that have failed to preserve the existing e-consent survey/forms submitted by enrolled participants and/or would prevent new participants from submitting a valid e-consent survey/form.
Ultimately, even if the REDCap Team provides additional help, it is the responsibility of the builder/point person to evaluate the impact of the revisions they've made to their e-consent form on: 1) the e-consent survey/forms that existing participants have already submitted, 2) the e-consent survey/form that will be presented to new participants, 3) any other data that's been collected, 4) the data collection workflow and the functionality that facilitates it, paying special attention functionality involved obtaining consent, and 5) the components of peripheral features the project team relies on for managing data collection, and getting e-consent surveys to potential participants and collecting their responses.
Change Tips & Best Practices
- At a minimum, the e-consent survey/form t will need to be updated when IRB approval dates change.
- If IRB requires you to submit a copy of the revised e-consent survey/form, reach out to the REDCap Team to request a copy of your project before submitting your form edits for approval in REDCap.