-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 191
[ENH] Move PET DICOM correspondences into term definitions #2298
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Add DICOM correspondence to term definition while we're here
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #2298 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 82.81% 82.81%
=======================================
Files 22 22
Lines 1693 1693
=======================================
Hits 1402 1402
Misses 291 291 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
mnoergaard
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
effigies
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Tracer DICOM tags were added by @bendhouseart in #1021, and signed off by @mnoergaard, @sappelhoff and @tsalo. The question of whether to put them in terms or in the table as addenda was addressed:
I'm not confident enough to say that these tags should belong in the
metadata.ymlas many of these terms are often more explicitly defined (or known....) by the experiment designer/performer or simply not present in the dicom headers. Adding them to the tables provides a bread crumb for a user to extract this info if they're not omnipotent concerning the experiment or the metadata.
Originally posted by @bendhouseart in #1021 (comment)
I'm okay removing them altogether, if that's the updated consensus, or putting them back (with comments) in metadata.yaml. From the perspective of someone reading the PET page, there is no difference; the difference is in the glossary or looking the term up in the schema directly.
Any updates to the text for clarity would be appreciated.
|
Can't say that I'm not pleased to see src/schema/rules/sidecars/pet.yaml slimmed down nearly 100 lines. Cheers 👍 |
Follow-up to #2294.
This PR moves the
Corresponds to [DICOM Tag ...section intoobjects.metadataterms for PET. This excludes terms likeInstitutionName, which are recommended for many data types that are not converted from DICOM.Minor cleanups here:
BodyPartentry. This was probably just an error in schematization.InjectionStartandInjectionStop, change "with respect to"TimeZero"in the default unit seconds." to "with respect to"TimeZero", in seconds." BIDS does not support alternative units, so we can use simple language here.PharmaceuticalName. While worth pointing out, it doesn't need to be pointed out multiple times, and it seems reasonable to include this in the term definition itself.rules.sidecars.petwithout adding toobjects.metadatabecause they were already present in theobjects.metadataterm.