[PRE REVIEW]: CRSocket: A web app component facilitating the administration of digital trials from a separate device

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: @henrikdvn (Henrik Dvergsdal)
Repository: https://github.com/henrikdvn/CRSocket
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch):
Version: 1.13 (CommTest)
Editor: @britta-wstnr
Reviewers: @rabdill, @lukaszjablonski
Managing EiC: Olivia Guest

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/3becacf85e23eb6be092c08148cb4be2"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/3becacf85e23eb6be092c08148cb4be2/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/3becacf85e23eb6be092c08148cb4be2/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/3becacf85e23eb6be092c08148cb4be2)

Author instructions

Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @henrikdvn. Currently, there isn't a JOSS editor assigned to your paper.

The AEiC suggestion for the handling editor is @britta-wstnr.

@henrikdvn if you have any suggestions for potential reviewers then please mention them here in this thread (without tagging them with an @). In addition, this list of people have already agreed to review for JOSS and may be suitable for this submission (please start at the bottom of the list).

Editor instructions

The JOSS submission bot @editorialbot is here to help you find and assign reviewers and start the main review. To find out what @editorialbot can do for you type:

@editorialbot commands

[editorialbot]

Hello human, I'm @editorialbot, a robot that can help you with some common editorial tasks.

For a list of things I can do to help you, just type:

@editorialbot commands

For example, to regenerate the paper pdf after making changes in the paper's md or bib files, type:

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88  T=0.04 s (1623.5 files/s, 224682.3 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JavaScript                      13            819            748           3059
HTML                            28            229              0           2194
PHP                             20            276            284            852
Markdown                         3            143              0            620
TeX                              1              9              0            152
CSS                              3             50              4             87
YAML                             1              1              4             18
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            69           1527           1040           6982
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

OK DOIs

- 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2022.119241 is OK
- 10.1371/journal.pone.0260695 is OK
- 10.1111/desc.13193 is OK
- 10.1016/j.infbeh.2021.101649 is OK
- 10.1080/15248372.2015.1061528 is OK
- 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01021 is OK
- 10.1002/acp.3569 is OK
- 10.1177/0894439319851503 is OK
- 10.3233/JAD-160545 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 1082

[oliviaguest]

@britta-wstnr do you have capacity for this? 😊

[editorialbot]

⚠️ An error happened when generating the pdf.

[britta-wstnr]

Hi - this seems to be a bit outside of my expertise, so I would like to read the paper first to get a better overview! 🙂
But it seems to not be compiling, @henrikdvn can you have a look at that?

[oliviaguest]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

⚠️ An error happened when generating the pdf.

[oliviaguest]

@henrikdvn can you try putting the paper at the top level in the repo? I think this causes the problem with generating the pdf?

[henrikdvn]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

⚠️ An error happened when generating the pdf.

[henrikdvn]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

⚠️ An error happened when generating the pdf.

[henrikdvn]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

⚠️ An error happened when generating the pdf.

[henrikdvn]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

⚠️ An error happened when generating the pdf.

[henrikdvn]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

⚠️ An error happened when generating the pdf.

[henrikdvn]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

⚠️ An error happened when generating the pdf.

[henrikdvn]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

👉📄 Download article proof 📄 View article proof on GitHub 📄 👈

[henrikdvn]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88  T=0.05 s (1305.1 files/s, 180597.0 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JavaScript                      13            819            748           3059
HTML                            28            229              0           2194
PHP                             20            276            284            852
Markdown                         3            143              0            619
TeX                              1              9              0            152
CSS                              3             50              4             87
YAML                             1              1              4             18
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            69           1527           1040           6981
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 1079

[henrikdvn]

@britta-wstnr: Sorry about the mess with the paper, but it compiles now. Don't know about the technical part, but I think the research significance may be within your field. Also found some reviewers on the list that I think should be able to review the software:
lukaszjablonski, Milantex, abhishekvp, kinow.

[oliviaguest]

@editorialbot invite @britta-wstnr as editor

[editorialbot]

Invitation to edit this submission sent!

[britta-wstnr]

Hi - sorry for only getting back here now, this week has been busy! @henrikdvn thanks for suggesting reviewers! @oliviaguest I'll take this on then.

[britta-wstnr]

@editorialbot assign @britta-wstnr as editor

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @britta-wstnr is now the editor

[britta-wstnr]

To be transparent about the progress: I have reached out to reviewers via e-mail.

[henrikdvn]

@britta-wstnr Thanks. Is it ok to make minor changes at this stage? I sort of get blind for mistakes etc. when writing things and tend to discover them when I take a second look after a few day's break.

[britta-wstnr]

You mean for the paper @henrikdvn ? That should be fine, go ahead!

[britta-wstnr]

No success in inviting reviewers via e-mail so far, moving it here ...

[britta-wstnr]

Hi @abhishekvp and @lukaszjablonski 👋

Would you be willing to review the submission:
CRSocket: A web app component facilitating the administration of digital trials from a separate device
for The Journal of Open Source Software (JOSS)?

The review concerns the software CRSocket and a short paper about it. The review happens fully on GitHub.

You can learn more about the the review process and our conflict of interest policy in the reviewer guidelines here.

If you are available to review this submission, please let me know and I can add you as a reviewer. The review process will start (in a separate GitHub issue) once a sufficient number of reviewers have been found.

Thank you!
Britta

[lukaszjablonski]

Thank you @britta-wstnr. Yes, sure. I'm happy to review it.

[britta-wstnr]

Great, @lukaszjablonski, I appreciate it! 🙏
The reviewing process will start once I have found a sufficient number of reviewers, you will get pinged once we move forward.

[britta-wstnr]

Ping @abhishekvp 👋
Kind reminder for my review invitation (see comment above) 🙏

[britta-wstnr]

Hi @rabdill and @Milantex👋

Would you be willing to review the submission:
CRSocket: A web app component facilitating the administration of digital trials from a separate device
for The Journal of Open Source Software (JOSS)?

The review concerns the software CRSocket and a short paper about it. The review happens fully on GitHub.

You can learn more about the the review process and our conflict of interest policy in the reviewer guidelines here.

If you are available to review this submission, please let me know and I can add you as a reviewer. The review process will start (in a separate GitHub issue) once a sufficient number of reviewers have been found.

Thank you!
Britta

[rabdill]

Hi @britta-wstnr, I'd be happy to review.

[britta-wstnr]

Hi @rabdill - that's great, I appreciate it! 🙏
I'll start the reviewing process soon - you'll get pinged about it.

[britta-wstnr]

@editorialbot add @rabdill as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@rabdill added to the reviewers list!

[britta-wstnr]

@editorialbot add @lukaszjablonski as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@lukaszjablonski added to the reviewers list!

[britta-wstnr]

Hi @lukaszjablonski and @rabdill ,
hi @henrikdvn,

let's move this submission to the reviewing step 🌱 . That means that this PRE-REVIEW will be closed and you will be pinged in a new thread - there'll be detailed info how to proceed there!

[britta-wstnr]

@editorialbot start review

[editorialbot]

OK, I've started the review over in #5658.