ProtocolStudy-Data/ReferenceCodes.org at master · lambda-land/ProtocolStudy-Data · GitHub

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
* Syntax

N ::= -TKa*
   \vert  N, N (multiple codes)
   \vert  N; N (sequential codes)
   \vert  N\vert N (alternative codes)

* Types of document referred to

| Code | Description                                 |
|------+---------------------------------------------|
| M    | manufacturer instructions                   |
| P    | academic protocol or paper                  |
| L    | institutional lab protocol or policy        |
| E    | equipment instructions                      |

* Integration strategy

| Code | Description                                               |
|------+-----------------------------------------------------------|
| A    | concurrent: use reference in parallel                     |
| B    | splice: use reference, then continue                      |
| R    | before: use reference before starting                     |
| S    | merge: combine reference with protocol in unspecified way |

* Non-integration Role

| Code | Description                                             |
|------+---------------------------------------------------------|
| X    | derivation: protocol was created by modifying reference |
| C    | comparison: protocol contains similarity to reference   |
| I    | background: additional informaion                       |

* Features

| Code | Description                                    |
|------+------------------------------------------------|
| m    | modifications: use reference with modification |
| h(%) | link: location of/link to external source      |


* Coding notes

1) In some protocols, <R> recipes are listed at the end of the document; in others they're not in our PDF but
in an appendix.  I've treated them all as though they're external, for consistency.  I don't think it's
relevant to our research questions that CSHP has changed the layout of their issue in this way; the user still
has to do the same function of combining recipes with the protocol

2) When Discussion kind of sections talk about other academic references in relation to this protocol,
it's not always clear whether the refs are other protocols you can compare or combine with this one, or
just academic discussions of the issues involved.  I've tried to guess based on the text, but these decisions
may not be very reliable.

3) The I code may reiterate some steps in the protocol in more detail; so it might just
be counted as an "A" code, but we don't have it in front of us to check.