You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Chatted with @DCEW re two ICB output reports to be generated in the week of 26 January 2026. Details supplied to the DS inbox.
Note
Actually, turns out that output reports from this repository aren't needed, but keeping this issue open as a thought experiment.
Have we done an ICB-level output report before, @jacgrout? Pretty sure we haven't.
What changes would need to be made to allow for ICB-level reports to be created?
Haven't done a full investigation, but a few lookups would need to be amended/created, like the scheme-code to scheme-name lookup. Clearly functions like get_nhp_result_sets() would also have to be tweaked, since this function returns only NHP schemes given that lookup.
This could be worked on in a branch as a one-off solution for the short-term goal. We could integrate it to the main codebase later if appropriate.
Chatted with @DCEW re two ICB output reports to be generated in the week of 26 January 2026. Details supplied to the DS inbox.
Note
Actually, turns out that output reports from this repository aren't needed, but keeping this issue open as a thought experiment.
Have we done an ICB-level output report before, @jacgrout? Pretty sure we haven't.
What changes would need to be made to allow for ICB-level reports to be created?
Haven't done a full investigation, but a few lookups would need to be amended/created, like the scheme-code to scheme-name lookup. Clearly functions like
get_nhp_result_sets()would also have to be tweaked, since this function returns only NHP schemes given that lookup.This could be worked on in a branch as a one-off solution for the short-term goal. We could integrate it to the main codebase later if appropriate.