Data Release Workflows & SOPsπŸ”—

This document outlines the staged workflow for selecting, releasing, and validating data for public dissemination. Key stakeholders include the HCAC Project Manager (PM), HBCD Data Coordinating Center (HDCC), Oversight Group (OG), Workgroups (WGs), and Lasso.

Release TimelineπŸ”—

The release timeline for determination of variables to include in the release, study instrument documentation (or "READMEs" - see details), final QC of data as available via the Lasso Pre-Release System, etc. is as follows:

Release 3.0 TimelineπŸ”—

Release timeline

Process for Determination of Release TimelineπŸ”—

The release timeline is determined as follows:

  1. HDCC proposes a timelineΒ 
  2. HCAC leadership approves proposed timeline
  3. Program approves proposed timeline
  4. Feedback is acquired from Workgroups

Stages of the Release WorkflowπŸ”—

Stage 1: Determine Variables to Include & Data Filters for ReleaseπŸ”—

Variable Inclusion Sign-OffπŸ”—

The HCAC PM (Stephanie Averill) collaborates with the HDCC WG Liaison (Jen Zink) to generate a comprehensive list of potential variables for the upcoming data release.

  • The full list is circulated to all Workgroups and subject matter experts (SMEs), who mark each variable as INCLUDE or NOT INCLUDED in the Variable Inclusion Form.
  • From this list, a Variable Inclusion Sign-Off Form is generated for HDCC/HCAC Leadership to review the proposed measures to be included/excluded from public release.
  • Proposed public release measures are then brought to the Steering Committee for final sign-off.

Release measure inclusion sign off RACI:

lasso

Data Filters Sign-OffπŸ”—

In addition to deciding which variables to include in the release, the HDCC, HCAC, and Workgroups collaborate to determine general administrative inclusion/exclusion filters (as opposed to specific variable filters, which are tracked elsewhere) to be applied to the data release. This includes, but is not limited to:

  • Site exclusions (e.g., Florida)
  • Cell size per site
  • Cohort (e.g., post-natal recruitment)
  • Outlier or "impossible value" removal (yes/no)
  • etc.

Data filters applied to Release 1.0 are described in detail on the R1.0 Release Notes under Exclusion Criteria & Filters.

Status Tracker: View the latest status of filter sign-offs in the Data Filters Sign Off Form.

Stage 2: Integrate Planned Measures in Beta ReleasesπŸ”—

The HDCC implements the measures marked as INCLUDE and begins the first versioned Beta Release (BR) approximately 1–2 months after the data freeze. Note: An updated SOP is under development to address scenarios where a measure is marked as β€œINCLUDE,” but cannot be implemented during the current release.

Beta Release (BR) Sprint CycleπŸ”—

  1. Known issues and new features are prioritized for the sprint.
  2. Versioned BRs are released on the 4th Friday of every month.
  3. Each BR is accompanied by a BR Hot Sheet completed by HDCC to guide Lasso ingestion - see Hot Sheet template.

BR Hot Sheet - Key Areas

Date/Time Confirmation Specifies when BRX is ready and identifies the single point of contact.
Compliance Checklist Highlights potential issues that could make the data non-compliant (e.g., missing participants in `participant.tsv`) or disrupt loading or downloading.
Sign-Off and Documentation Responsible parties provide a clear/thoughtful review and sign off on the release contents. This includes confirmation that the BR Release Notes are documented under Change Logs in the internal Docs site.

Lasso IngestionπŸ”—

Once the BR Hot Sheet is finalized, the HDCC sends it to Lasso to initiate BR ingestion, which includes Lasso ingestion QA. After ingestion is complete, the HDCC liaison (Jen Zink) notifies WGs that data are available in Lasso and requests they complete Quality Control (QC) reviews. Lasso obtains final sign-off from Workgroups on datasets in their release-ready form, with applied filters, via the Lasso Pre-Release System.

Stage 3: Data Quality Issue Identification, Reporting, and HandlingπŸ”—

There are 2 bins of issues with separate pipelines for reporting/handling:

Bin 1: Internal FindingsπŸ”—
  • Identified during Lasso ingestion QA
  • Tracked by HDCC on the internal Monday board for resolution
Bin 2: Workgroup FindingsπŸ”—

Issues identified by WGs, analysts, or via LORIS, reported in collaboration with the HDCC liaison (Jen Zink). These issues are logged in a structured format for BR sprint planning and resolution by HDCC. Once Bin 2 issues are added to an upcoming BR sprint and the corrections appear in a versioned BR in Lasso, Jen communicates to original reporter that the known issue is addressed and verifies the correction is implemented as expected in the Lasso system.

WG Template for Reporting IssuesπŸ”—
Issue Category Data Error, Data Improvement, Data Dictionary Request
Data Element/Instrument Affected Element/instrument name
Description Explanation of issue
Proposed Fix Description of fix
Reporter SME/analyst name and contact info

Stage 4: Data Sign-off and Public ReleaseπŸ”—

When the the second-to-last BR prior to Public Release is loaded in Lasso, the HDCC liaison (Jen Zink) schedules one-on-one sign-off meetings with all WG chairs/SMEs who have measures in the planned release for final QC/review in Lasso. Prior to these meetings, WG chairs/SMEs have pre-QC’ed their data in the latest BR. During these meetings, Jen reviews:

  1. Past QC items that have been identified and corrected in previous BRs
  2. Any further QC action-items to be addressed prior to public release (if applicable) based on WG/SME review of the latest BR and items identified by Jen

During the one-on-one sign-off meetings, if no further action-items are found by either the WG/SMEs or Jen, the WGs/SMEs sign off on their measures via this sign-off sheet template.

If further QC action-items are found in the second-to-last BR during the one-on-one sign-off meetings, the WG/SMEs do NOT sign off on their measures. Jen communicates the data issues back to the HDCC via the centralized Monday Board, so the remaining items can be prioritized for the final BR prior to public release.

When the final BR prior to public release is loaded into Lasso, Jen schedules one-on-one sign-off meetings with the remaining WGs/SMEs who were awaiting corrections to their data prior to sign off. During these meetings, Jen reviews the list of items that were identified in the last round of QC with the WGs/SMEs to ensure the correction is implemented as expected in the Lasso; the WGs/SMEs then sign off on their measures via the same google form above.

In the event that data issues remain, or new issues are identified in QC of the final BR during the one-on-one sign-off meetings, Jen collaborates with the WGs/SMEs and Luci Moore to document these as β€˜Known Issues’ for the Data Release Documentation site. Jen reports the known issues on the HDCC centralized Monday Board so they can be prioritized for the Patch Release.

Patch ReleasesπŸ”—

Patch releases occur only to address β€œKnown Issues” in the current public data release; they are not intended for releasing additional sessions/visits, protocol elements, or participants. Known issues are either identified via the HDCC, WGs/SMEs, or the scientific community (users of the public release data via the Lasso ticketing system). Once they are identified and reported to HDCC, they are then placed on the centralized Monday Board for prioritization.

When known issues are addressed, HDCC sends samples of the corrected data to the respective WGs/SMEs for their confirmation. Once the data fixes are confirmed by SMEs, the corrected data elements are then ingested into the Lasso QC environment (where the BRs are QCed). Jen further QC’s the data in the Lasso environment to ensure all fixes are implemented appropriately and schedules one-on-one sign-off meetings with each WG with a measure in the patch release.

During these sign off meetings, the following is covered:

  1. The WG confirmation the data issues are addressed (in Lasso)
  2. Jen confirmation the data issues are addressed (in Lasso)
  3. WG sign-off (via google form)

Approved Updates to Future ReleasesπŸ”—

See the approved updates to release 2.0 in the Release Notes on the HBCD Data Release Docs site: Release 2.0 (Release Date TBA).

Responsibility Assignment MatricesπŸ”—

Below we outline the individuals responsible for various stages of the release across data modalities via RACI matrices, which outline the following:

Note that items outlined below pertain specifically to the data release stage. Responsibility matrices for general processing and quality control stages can be found on under Data Processing Workflows.

Tabulated Data β–Έ
Study Stage Step Location Responsible Accountable Consulted/
Informed
Pre-Release Prep Generate Release Candidate IDs for Public Release UMN HST Reed McEwan Reed McEwan -/-
Data QC Review of Dashboards and Completeness LORISLassoRippleHCAC Santiago Torres (LORIS), Jen Zink (Lasso), Sauren Ravencroft (Ripple), Stephanie Averill (HCAC) WG Leads -/-
Pre-Release Sign Off on Release Candidate Lasso Jen Zink, WG Leads Damien Fair -/-
Imaging Data β–Έ
Study Stage Step Location Responsible Accountable Consulted/
Informed
Pre-Release Prep Determine Release Candidate and Process with Sign Off WashU MRI WGs, Eric Feczko, Jen Zink Chris Smyser -/-
Data Process De-identification of BIDS data UMN MSI Sriharshitha Anuganti Sriharshitha Anuganti -/-
Data Process Run processing pipelines UMN MSI CBRAIN Tanya Pandhi [C] SMEs
Data Process Transfer derivatives to LORIS, re-inserting DCCIDs UMN MSI Harshitha Anuganti, Tanya Pandhi, Jesse Erdmann Harshitha Anuganti -/-
Data Process Ingest derivatives into LORIS and create tabulated imaging files UMN MSI Cecile Madjar, Santiago Torres, Samir Das Cecile Madjar -/-
Data QC + Action Post-processing QC (Manual & Automated) CDNI (UMN) Michael Anderson Eric Feczko [C] Lucille Moore
[I] Damien Fair
Data Process Move source BIDS to platform UMN MSI Tanya Pandhi, Data Loading Team (Lasso) Tanya Pandhi -/-
Data Process Move BIDS phenotype files to platform UMN MSI Harshitha Anuganti, Tanya Pandhi, Jesse Erdmann, Data Loading Team (Lasso) Harshitha Anuganti -/-
Data Process Move raw BIDS and derivatives to platform UMN MSI Tanya Pandhi Tanya Pandhi -/-
Data QC + Action SMEs review data Various MRI SMEs, Jen Zink Eric Feczko -/-
Data QC + Action Data corrections Various Erik Feczko, Jen Zink, Tanya Pandhi Tanya Pandhi -/-
Documentation of Processes Documentation of processes, known issues, etc. UMN MSI
CDNI
MRI SMEs, HDCC Lucille Moore -/-
Sign Off SMEs sign off on data Lasso Jen Zink, Eric Feczko Jen Zink -/-
EEG β–Έ
Study Stage Step Location Responsible Accountable Consulted/
Informed
Pre-Release Prep: Determine Release Candidate and Process with Sign Off UMD EEG Core Santiago Morales, EEG WG Nathan Fox [I] Program
QC Pre-release data UMD EEG Core Santiago Morales Nathan Fox [I] Program

Release Management & UtilitiesπŸ”—

Data Management & Release MeetingsπŸ”—

There are several regular calls where release action items are discussed and tracked:

Meeting (agenda/notes linked) Meeting Facilitator Stakeholders
HDCC Data Release WG
Mondays 11 AM CT
Maren Macgregor-Hannah UMNLORISLasso
HBCD Workgroup calls
(action items track onMonday.com)
Time/day varies
First 10 min of WG calls are dedicated to discussing QC and data releases, facilitated by Jen Zink HBCD WorkgroupsLasso
MRI QC
Wednesdays 4 PM CT (biweekly)
Don Hagler LORIS JCVI HST MIDB
ABCD-HBCD Release
Tuesdays 10 AM CT
Deanna Barch ABCD team (JCVI)UMNLORISLasso
ABCD-HBCD Sync
Thursday 2 PM CT (Biweekly)
Janosch Linkersdoerfer ABCD team (JCVI)UMNLORIS
HDCC Architecture & Implementation
Tuesdays 3:30 PM CT
Maren Macgregor-Hannah UMNLORISLassoWashUJCVI
HBCD LORIS Implementation
Wednesdays 1:30 PM CT
Maren Macgregor-Hannah UMNLORISLasso
HDCC IT Workgroup Call (EEG, Biospecimens, and other WGs)
Fridays 3 PM CT
Maren Macgregor-Hannah LassoLORISJCVIUMDLIBR
HDCC/HCAC Biweekly Calls
Friday 2 PM CT (biweekly)
Site monitors HCACUMNWashU
EMR
Mondays 4 PM CT (biweekly)
Nicole Venteris HST HBCD Workgroup LIBR
NIH-BTB
Wednesday 11 AM CT (monthly)
Maren Macgregor-Hannah LORIS HST HBCD Workgroup App Devs

Project Management UtilitiesπŸ”—

Platform Use Case(s)
Monday.com board Tracking release actions items
Confluence Storage of all internal documentation and protocols
AirTable Document current protocol, change requests (REDCap or Responsible Conduct request modifications), IRB approvals, initial list of included measures in data releases, QC pages, SC approval, etc. Also used to keep track of staff member item-level access to different working platforms and related required paperworks.
Slack Team and topic-specific communication/coordination
HBCD DCC Internal Docs (this site) Organized, curated, and centralized internal documentation
Google Docs Meeting agendas/notes; holds historical documentation of workflows, context of decision-making, etc.