You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I have another suggestion. Sometimes one might wish to add raw denominator (and/or numerator) data to an antibiogram for each result. It might be verbose, but could be used for some downstream processing.
I tested a small hard-coded modification to the antibiogram code, with success except for the use of the digits parameter (I must have misunderstood some context). It would be little addition to have a parameter like raw_n with default NA and possible values of "N/D" and "D".
Yes, that's a nice idea. They are 'kind of' added already at the moment, where I for the implementation followed this table from a recent paper to present the data. It's also shown in our manual:
The first column contains the denominators, but that can of course be different per antibiotic. That's not optimal. Where would you want to present the D or N/D then? Perhaps instead of the %SI?
Thanks, I had noted the ability to provide in aggregate. In the example I gave I have presented by appending to the %SI, e.g. 6 becomes 6% (6/100). But it could be implemented with flexibility to provide denominators only, e.g. 6% (100). Alternative approaches could duplicate columns (e.g. AMK % and AMK n/d) or rows (e.g. CoNS % and CoNS n/d).
For me, I'm thinking of it more for downstream processing than for presentation - i.e. could be included as a hover detail in a plotly chart. There are use cases for presentation. If it is provided in a structured way, users can post-process to present richly-formatted tables (e.g. present the denominator in a small font size, different colour).
I have another suggestion. Sometimes one might wish to add raw denominator (and/or numerator) data to an antibiogram for each result. It might be verbose, but could be used for some downstream processing.
I tested a small hard-coded modification to the antibiogram code, with success except for the use of the digits parameter (I must have misunderstood some context). It would be little addition to have a parameter like
raw_n
with defaultNA
and possible values of "N/D" and "D".I'll be interested in your thoughts!
function (x, antibiotics = where(is.sir), mo_transform = "shortname", ab_transform = NULL, syndromic_group = NULL, add_total_n = TRUE, only_all_tested = FALSE, digits = 0, col_mo = NULL, language = get_AMR_locale(), minimum = 30, combine_SI = TRUE, sep = " + ", info = interactive()) { ... out <- out %pm>% pm_summarise(SI = paste0(round(numerator * 100/total, digits = digits), "% (", total, ")")) ... long_to_wide <- function(object, digs) { #object$SI <- round(object$SI * 100, digits = digs) ... }
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: