Search



  

Snap2SNOMED is designed for collaborative map development. Currently, it supports multiple users working simultaneously on a map in a single author, single reviewer per source code manner. This means that work can be divided across a number of personnel to get work done.

There are future plans to support dual independent mapping processes.

A variety of workflows are currently supported, including:

WorkflowDescriptionProcess flow
Single user author + reviewA single user completes all author tasks for the map and then completes a review process on all mapped rows

single user author review process flow

Single user author (no review)

A single user completes all author tasks for the map.

No review process is required

single user author only process flow

Single author + single review

A single author completes all author tasks for the map.

A second user, the reviewer, will complete a review process on all mapped rows

single author single review process flow

Multiple author + multiple review

Two or more authors create mappings for each source code of the map.

Two or more reviewers completes the review processes on all mapped rows.

NOTE: A user can act as both an author and reviewer within the overall map (as assigned in a task), however rules have been implemented to discourage the scenario of a user to reviewing their own authoring work. This can be overridden by an owner if required.

In the example flow shown, User 1 and User 4 can be the same person, ideally only reviewing the work of Users 1+2.

multiple author multiple reviewer process flow

Tips on using tasks

  • Source codes can only be assigned to one task of each type at a time, however they can be assigned to both an author and a review task at the same time. This means that a source code needs to be released (task completed or cancelled) before it can be assigned to another task of the same type.
  • You can use tasks to group together similar content to ensure that users are looking at similar things at the same time and improve efficiency and consistency of mappings.

Feedback
  • No labels