Talk:Review Process

<Proposed Update>

The same review and approval process occurs prior to publishing a Public Comment Profile, a Consensus Profile, a Technically Confirmed Profile, Claim Confirmed Profile or a Clinically Confirmed Profile. Just the criteria change.

Remember, this is the QA point. It doesn't have to be perfect. It does have to be good.

Review (Biomarker Committee)

• Authors/Editor of the Profile request pre-approval review once they feel work on the current stage has been completed
• Biomarker Committee assigns/recruits reviewers for Profile sections
  • Ideally each section should be covered by more than one reviewer
  • Reviewing assignments can be divided up any way that is convenient
  • It doesn't hurt to have some reviewers read through the profile in its entirety (finds inconsistencies/gaps)
• Reviewers check the Profile meets the criteria for the stage as well as general clarity/quality
• Resolve any questions/comments/clarifications raised by the reviewers

Approve (Biomarker Committee)

• The Secretariat circulates a Ballot asking Biomarker Committee members to approve that the content of the Profile meets the criteria for the stage
• Generally the ballot period should be several weeks to allow time to review the full Profile text
• In the case of approving to publish for Public Comment, it is acceptable to instead hold a vote during a committee meeting.

Approve (Modality Coordinating Committee)

• A Vote in committee (for Public Comment) or Ballot (for Consensus, Technically Confirmed, Claim Confirmed or Clinically Confirmed) to approve the document as fit for the next phase.