feat: Split up cohort view general design into two sections: General …

[connoratrug]

…design and Population and add some missing data items

Closes #3609

see issue

[mswertz]

code looks good @BrendaHijmans please approve after functional review.

P.S. I notice that if there are ontoogies without nesting then we get a lot of empty space (to hold the arrow down that is not there). Would that be something to fix? I.e. that we don't indent when there is no reason? Or that we introduce another icon for items that have no children?

[connoratrug]

code looks good @BrendaHijmans please approve after functional review.

P.S. I notice that if there are ontoogies without nesting then we get a lot of empty space (to hold the arrow down that is not there). Would that be something to fix? I.e. that we don't indent when there is no reason? Or that we introduce another icon for items that have no children?

Yes i noticed, this is actually a bit tricky , as sometimes the tree is used in a larger list where you would like the items to left-align, suggest to handle this an a separate issue, we could add a prop to render the tree as list if max-depth = 1 , but then you would need to check all tree use cases to see if it should do this

Even in the case show here there is something to be said for having a left scannable edge

[BrendaHijmans]

Can you put 'Population' into a separate panel? It seems inconsistent to keep two headings in one panel.

As described in #3609, can you name 'Population oncology topology' 'ICDO site' and cab you name 'Population oncology morphology' 'ICDO morphology'?

Can you rename 'Age group at inclusion' to 'Poplation age groups'? This was agreed upon by Eleanor and Kim.

[EleanorHyde-UMCG]

Can you put 'Population' into a separate panel? It seems inconsistent to keep two headings in one panel.

As described in #3609, can you name 'Population oncology topology' 'ICDO site' and cab you name 'Population oncology morphology' 'ICDO morphology'?

Can you rename 'Age group at inclusion' to 'Poplation age groups'? This was agreed upon by Eleanor and Kim.

In addition to what Brenda added above, could you also please do the following as well?

• check you've not accidentally removed the "Design schematic" field - I can't see it currently in dev and this may be a data issue, but in acc it should still be visible
• add the 'Publications' field under the Design paper field
• add 'Population disease' under 'Main medical condition'
• add the following fields under 'Access Conditions':
• • Release type
• • Linkage possibility description
• • Data access fee
• • Prelinked
• • Data holder
• • Data use conditions

Thanks!

[sonarcloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
No data about Coverage
No data about Duplication

See analysis details on SonarCloud