Remove dependencies on RevMan 5 and RevMan 5 format for generating submission and export packages
What business value does this roadmap item create? / Which problem is this roadmap item trying to solve?
Strategic fit
Link to strategy: GOAL 1 Streamlining production of reviews and simplifying editorial systems and processes
Future of review production project: Retire RevMan 5
Hypothesis
Removing dependencies on RevMan 5 code and RevMan 5 format when generating JATS is a blocker for introducing new review format and has the potential to improve performance when generating submission and export files.
Success metric
Which assumptions are made in relation to the value?
What are the dependencies for fulfilling the business value?
What are the risks related to this roadmap item?
What is included in the scope of this solution?
- Generate submission and export package from reviewDB
- Remove dependency on RevMan 5 library from jats core and reviewDB
- analysis results
- create analysis results as input for plots by calling meta-analysis api
- plots
- Generate flow diagram as e.g. SVG without RevMan 5 library
- Jats core does not use RevMan 5 library to get the plots
- Do not add a dependency on the RevMan 5 file being pre-processed to add plots before calling jats core
- analysis results
- Establish a new way to create JATS packages that doesn't depend on RevMan 5 files or jats core
- Service in reviewDB that converts html in reviewDB directly to supplementary materials or JATS
- Consider not supporting tracked changes in JATS view
- Remove dependency on RevMan 5 library from jats core and reviewDB
- Replace RevMan 5 file in CLIB
- We want to retain jats core as a way of converting RM5 files to "old" jats packages
- We don't want to use RevMan 5 files to create the new format including supplementary materials
- Performance for generating submission package should not be worse
Key question: is it worth doing this for the existing review format or should we only remove dependencies for reviews using new review format?
Could we do it for new review format first and then iterate to support current format?
Q: Is there a way to avoid Jats core calling the DTA meta-analysis api, for instance by providing DTA calculations in a separate object (assumes Archie does not need to generate the JATS from RevMan 5 file which it may need to...) . We don't want to enhance the RevMan 5 format to include more DTA data as this would not work on old reviews.
Out of scope
- Supporting CCA workflow
- Archie view of old versions & ability to resend old versions for publication will be dependent on RevMan 5 format
- External dependencies on RevMan 5 format
- GRADEpro