- 6.2K All Categories
- 279 Discussions
- 173 General Discussion
- 21 Roadmap & New Feature Ideas
- 28 Add-Ons & Code Contributions
- 57 Forum How-Tos
- 1K Q & A
- 223 Installation & Setup
- 385 Study Build, Rules, and CRFs
- 138 Data Entry, Monitoring, and Data Management
- 113 Extracting & Reporting
- 12 Regulatory Compliance
- 35 Rule Designer
- 94 Web Services & Integration
- 11 Internationalization and Localization (i18n / L10n)
- 24 Announcements & Updates
- 24 Announcements & Updates
- 4.8K Archives
- 3K Users Mailing List
- 1.8K Developer Mailing List

We hope you'll join us for our 4/23 webinar on using data tables to apply reference ranges and AE codes in OC4. For more information and to register, visit https://register.gotowebinar.com/register/2882170018956684555

cpmasesa
Posts: **106** ✭

Hello,

Can somebody please help me with the width_decimal property in the CRF definition.

I have a field for weight and I expect it to be entered in the form 999.9.

In the width decimal property should I specify 5(1), 4(1) or 3(1) ?

I think that 4(1) is the right one but am not sure.

Please assist me on this.

Kind regards,

Clemens

Can somebody please help me with the width_decimal property in the CRF definition.

I have a field for weight and I expect it to be entered in the form 999.9.

In the width decimal property should I specify 5(1), 4(1) or 3(1) ?

I think that 4(1) is the right one but am not sure.

Please assist me on this.

Kind regards,

Clemens

0

This discussion has been closed.

## Comments

22✭2011/1/20 Clemens Masesa :

> > Hello,

> >

> > Can somebody please help me with the width_decimal property in the CRF

> > definition.

> >

> > I have a field for weight and I expect it to be entered in the form 999.9.

> >

> > In the width decimal property should I specify 5(1), 4(1) or 3(1) ?

> >

> > I think that 4(1) is the right one but am not sure.

You are right indeed.

Kind regards,

Matthias

-- Matthias Löbe, Inst. for Medical Informatics (IMISE), University of Leipzig Härtelstr. 16, D-04107 Leipzig, +49 341 97 16113, [email protected]

106✭A colleague just said to me that 5(1) is the correct option as in "999.9" there are a total of 5 characters (including the ".") and 1 decimal place.

So I suppose I would be right in saying that the "principal" for width_decimal is then x(y) where x = total number of digits and y is the digits to the right of the decimal point.

Kind regards,

Clemens

On 20/01/2011 17:30, Matthias Löbe wrote:

> Hello,

>

> 2011/1/20 Clemens Masesa:

>> Hello,

>>

>> Can somebody please help me with the width_decimal property in the CRF

>> definition.

>>

>> I have a field for weight and I expect it to be entered in the form 999.9.

>>

>> In the width decimal property should I specify 5(1), 4(1) or 3(1) ?

>>

>> I think that 4(1) is the right one but am not sure.

> You are right indeed.

>

> Kind regards,

> Matthias

>

106✭A colleague just said to me that 5(1) is the correct option as in "999.9" there are a total of 5 characters (including the ".") and 1 decimal place.

So I suppose I would be right in saying that the "principal" for width_decimal is then x(y) where x = total number of digits and y is the digits to the right of the decimal point.

Kind regards,

Clemens

On 20/01/2011 17:30, Matthias Löbe wrote:

> Hello,

>

> 2011/1/20 Clemens Masesa:

>> Hello,

>>

>> Can somebody please help me with the width_decimal property in the CRF

>> definition.

>>

>> I have a field for weight and I expect it to be entered in the form 999.9.

>>

>> In the width decimal property should I specify 5(1), 4(1) or 3(1) ?

>>

>> I think that 4(1) is the right one but am not sure.

> You are right indeed.

>

> Kind regards,

> Matthias

>

46✭use 5(1). I think the (.) is considered as a character and therefore to represent 999.9, you will have to use 5(1).

Kind Regards,

Michael.

2011/1/20 Matthias Löbe

Hello,

2011/1/20 Clemens Masesa :

> Hello,

>

> Can somebody please help me with the width_decimal property in the CRF

> definition.

>

> I have a field for weight and I expect it to be entered in the form 999.9.

>

> In the width decimal property should I specify 5(1), 4(1) or 3(1) ?

>

> I think that 4(1) is the right one but am not sure.

You are right indeed.

Kind regards,

Matthias

--

Matthias Löbe, Inst. for Medical Informatics (IMISE), University of Leipzig

Härtelstr. 16, D-04107 Leipzig, +49 341 97 16113, [email protected]

106✭With regards to width_decimal.

The instructions tab says that one can specify width_decimal for ST, INT and REAL data types.

I understand for REAL but not for ST or INT.

My understanding is that:

a) INT is an integer, no decimal places. Why are we allowed to specify a decimal then?

b) ST is a string (text). What would be the relevance of "decimal" here?

Kind regards,

Clemens

On 20/01/2011 17:30, Matthias Löbe wrote:

> Hello,

>

> 2011/1/20 Clemens Masesa:

>> Hello,

>>

>> Can somebody please help me with the width_decimal property in the CRF

>> definition.

>>

>> I have a field for weight and I expect it to be entered in the form 999.9.

>>

>> In the width decimal property should I specify 5(1), 4(1) or 3(1) ?

>>

>> I think that 4(1) is the right one but am not sure.

> You are right indeed.

>

> Kind regards,

> Matthias

>

106✭With regards to width_decimal.

The instructions tab says that one can specify width_decimal for ST, INT and REAL data types.

I understand for REAL but not for ST or INT.

My understanding is that:

a) INT is an integer, no decimal places. Why are we allowed to specify a decimal then?

b) ST is a string (text). What would be the relevance of "decimal" here?

Kind regards,

Clemens

On 20/01/2011 17:30, Matthias Löbe wrote:

> Hello,

>

> 2011/1/20 Clemens Masesa:

>> Hello,

>>

>> Can somebody please help me with the width_decimal property in the CRF

>> definition.

>>

>> I have a field for weight and I expect it to be entered in the form 999.9.

>>

>> In the width decimal property should I specify 5(1), 4(1) or 3(1) ?

>>

>> I think that 4(1) is the right one but am not sure.

> You are right indeed.

>

> Kind regards,

> Matthias

>

260but this infers that one of the remaining 4 characters is a . (dot), hereby

leaving 3 characters for the "principal". Hence 5(1) allows the following

range: [0.0 - 999.9]

Best regards,

Janus

Clemens Masesa

To

Sent by: [email protected]

[email protected] cc

nclinica.com [email protected]

Subject

Re: [Users] WIdth_Decimal Setting

20-01-2011 16:02

Please respond to

Clemens Masesa

; Please

respond to

[email protected]

.com

Thanks Mathias,

A colleague just said to me that 5(1) is the correct option as in

"999.9" there are a total of 5 characters (including the ".") and 1

decimal place.

So I suppose I would be right in saying that the "principal" for

width_decimal is then x(y) where x = total number of digits and y is the

digits to the right of the decimal point.

Kind regards,

Clemens

On 20/01/2011 17:30, Matthias Löbe wrote:

> > Hello,

> >

> > 2011/1/20 Clemens Masesa:

>> >> Hello,

>> >>

>> >> Can somebody please help me with the width_decimal property in the CRF

>> >> definition.

>> >>

>> >> I have a field for weight and I expect it to be entered in the form

999.9.

>> >>

>> >> In the width decimal property should I specify 5(1), 4(1) or 3(1) ?

>> >>

>> >> I think that 4(1) is the right one but am not sure.

> > You are right indeed.

> >

> > Kind regards,

> > Matthias

> >

22✭I read about that in

http://clinicalresearch.wordpress.com/2009/07/07/openclinica-3-0-features-part-ii/.

It says "For example, the creator could specify that a field should

have no more than 5 digits total with a maximum of 1 decimal place by

entering 5(1) in the Width_Decimal column of the OpenClinica

template."

I didn't considered the dot a digit then.

Since I've used this column once before, I've tested it now and WIDTH

is including the dot, therefore it is the total number of characters

and DECIMAL is the number of decimal places (round) so REAL 5(1) would

accept 12345 and 1234. and 123.4 and even 12.30 with 2 decimal

characters but not 12.34 or 012345 or 12.300.

I think it is more directed at data processing then data validation.

Matthias