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
Hi @satra,
I tried to add a consent sign in the demo project for the reproschema paper but then noticed that the content in sign in UI was hard-coded as follows:
do you know why it is designed this way? Shouldn't it be that sign is only a function/interface that allows a participant to sign their name and then click "agree/disagree" and the content of the consent form can be defined separately in each research protocol (in the current case, our demo activity here https://github.com/ReproNim/reproschema-demo/tree/main/activities/consent)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
yes, that's how it should be. however, i think we stopped working on it because we could not use it for consent. mit requested that we use docusign or redcap.
make sense; but wouldn't it be better if we update it since we want researchers beyond MIT to use it? It's always better to have the option of (not) using something than to have no option? If yes, then I can work on it.
Hi @satra,
I tried to add a consent sign in the demo project for the reproschema paper but then noticed that the content in
sign
in UI was hard-coded as follows:reproschema-ui/src/components/StudySign/StudySign.vue
Lines 21 to 24 in 2129a41
so the consent form will always look like http://www.repronim.org/reproschema-demo/#/activities/0
do you know why it is designed this way? Shouldn't it be that
sign
is only a function/interface that allows a participant to sign their name and then click "agree/disagree" and the content of the consent form can be defined separately in each research protocol (in the current case, our demo activity here https://github.com/ReproNim/reproschema-demo/tree/main/activities/consent)The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: