Remove user-generated PSCID structure?

[johnsaigle]

There's a note in Utility about removing user-generated PSCIDs.

Loris/php/libraries/Utility.class.inc

Lines 297 to 311 in 5aa861f

	/**
	* Transforms a config structure (such as in PSCID) into a
	* Perl-compatible regex expression for validation
	*
	* @param array $structure the structure root
	* @param string|null $siteAbbrev the site abbreviation, sometimes used as part
	* of the PSCID
	*
	* @return string the regex pattern
	*
	* @note This should probably be moved to the Candidate class, since it's
	* only used there to validate the PSCID
	* @note This should be removed when user-generated PSCID support is removed
	* @cleanup
	*/

Is this something that projects are using? If not, can we delete it?

[christinerogers]

I'd down-vote this. It runs counter to many studies' actual workflow. Subjects almost always have an internal ID informally assigned before they're registered in LORIS, because the order of registration in LORIS is not the same as the intake order (i.e. when recruiting/recording their name, phone, etc).
This is because LORIS input often happens only when a scheduled visit/timepoint is imminent, or they fill out surveys/testing or sign consent.
Ideally the intake ID can suggest the PSCID (Subject #7 -> PSCID MTL0007) to minimize risk of confusion for the study coordinator, and would not mandatorily be sequentially assigned.

[driusan]

@johnsaigle you're the one who added that note in 31dacf4

[johnsaigle]

@driusan That's how Git lays it out but if you dig a little that attribution goes to a PR containing a commit written by Justin Ng (and also @zaliqarosli). I think I just made the PR off of someone else's branch.

Do you have any idea why that note was referring to? Is this something we want to keep in LORIS?

[driusan]

I don't know what the note is referring to. @ridz1208 do you? You commented on the PR that @johnsaigle linked to above.

[driusan]

I sent a PR to just remove the note unless we come up with someone who knows what it's talking about.

[ridz1208]

@driusan I didnt comment on that part. I understand it as, this is necessary only for usergenerated PSCIDs. but it does make it sound like the goal is to remove that feature and I dont think we should.

Maybe we should move it to the PSCID class when It gets created ?

[driusan]

Why would the note be less confusing in the theoretical PSCID class?