Repeating Instances overwriting the first instance data

[gobyfish]

I have setup a Project in REDCap to capture grant information, which has a repeat instrument (which lists multiple researchers associated with the grant). I am using this module to pipe the researcher information into the Grants project (from another REDCap project). When I run the piping to update a record in the repeat instrument, it is overwriting the data that is there with the data from the second (or last) instance for that record. I believe I believe I have setup correctly as per the supporting documentation below. Has anyone had the same issue?

"Support for Repeating Instances - This module supports repeating instances in the following way: 'Unique Match Field' and 'Destination Field' settings may both (or either) be set to fields that exist in repeating instruments of the destination project.
The module cannot, however, support configurations that require the 'Alternate Source Match Field' or 'Source Field' settings to point to fields that exist in repeating instruments."_

[mmcev106]

@moorejr5, does this scenario present any risks for the project that supported the most recent round of changes to this module?

[JBarsotti]

Has this ever been resolved?

[moorejr5]

@gobyfish Hey, I've been looking into this and trying to replicate it. I can't seem to get the behavior you're reporting. I've tried it both with only the destination project having repeating instances, and with both the source and destination projects having repeating instances. I have not been able to get the incorrect instance information piping into a data form.

If you can provide more information on what you're seeing, it would be helpful to track things down. Are you using the button on data entry forms to pipe, is it set to pipe automatically, or are you using the 'Pipe All' on the Record Status Dashboard? What does the source project you're pulling data from look like in terms of events and repeating instances? Are the data fields from the source project on the same forms, and if not are some forms repeating and others not?

[JBarsotti]

Hi all, the person I am working on this with has provided some detailed information to me regarding this:

We took a fixed form as the contributing form in a unique project and enabled the module in a project that would receive data using the record_id [hcp_id] from the donating project to a repeating form in another project. ALL variables involved between projects had identical names. The [hcp_id] was the record_id in the donating project. It was the first variable in the repeating form.

I can't go into much more other than we started using auto, then switched to the button. When a new instance was opened, the auto-pipe pop-up showed activity, but there was nothing to pipe yet, as it depended on the [hcp_id] being entered into the repeating form. Once that was done, clicking Save & Stay re-initiated the C-P piping and we could then click Save & whatever.

When we opened a new form, piping started taking the values from previous instance and dropping them into the few fields AND AS I RECALL, we never entered a new [hcp_id], but had values in the fields.

I went back and forth using instance 1 through instance x, correcting 3 or 4 to contain the correct and expected values, but going back to the previous instance once again populated the wrong data. Saving that, it then would do the same for the previous instance minus 1. I could redo the data in any previous instance and opent the next instance (completed) and the data would change to the previous adjacent instance. We used the manual button after this was witnessed and it did the same thing.

Should mention that this functionality was testes in August 2024.

[HebelPierre]

@moorejr5 @mmcev106 @taylorr4 , i submitted some tracks on this issue to VUMC community : https://redcap.vumc.org/community/post.php?id=247589
Hope it could help to resolve this issue ?
This problem is very blocking for one of our major projects.
Thanks for you help

Cross-piping project issue with embedded fields and multiple events.pdf

[taylorr4]

@HebelPierre You may not realize, but @mmcev106 and his team (the DataCore Team at Vanderbilt) often cannot improve or even fix bugs in their EMs (e.g., Cross-Project Piping) unless someone is paying them. It's how their whole team structure works, for better or worse. So i just want to set expectations here regarding these things.

[HebelPierre]

Thanks @taylorr4 for this clarification. We are in the same case in my institution, to a lesser extent. That said, the problem submitted makes the EM unusable in many cases, which is a shame, because it is really a great tool. Too bad it is not integrated into the REDCap Core. But I understand, money is the sinews of war. Just in case, what would be the approximate budget needed to solve this problem?
I promise, if I win the lottery, I will make a specific donation for the resolution of this problem. REDCap is the most awesome tool I have ever worked with.

[taylorr4]

@HebelPierre :) Thanks for the kind words. I can't answer the budget question; only the DataCore Team can answer that. You might consider emailing them.

[HebelPierre]

@moorejr5 @mmcev106
could you please estimate how much it would cost to fix this problem?
thanks

[moorejr5]

@moorejr5 @mmcev106 could you please estimate how much it would cost to fix this problem? thanks

The start of the work flow for our team has to start contacting our supervisors. If you can send an email to datacore@vumc.org with requirements and possibly a link to the community post, they should get back to you.

[srojevsky]

@moorejr5 @mmcev106 could you please estimate how much it would cost to fix this problem? thanks

The start of the work flow for our team has to start contacting our supervisors. If you can send an email to datacore@vumc.org with requirements and possibly a link to the community post, they should get back to you.

Just curious, did get fixed?

[moorejr5]

@moorejr5 @mmcev106 could you please estimate how much it would cost to fix this problem? thanks

The start of the work flow for our team has to start contacting our supervisors. If you can send an email to datacore@vumc.org with requirements and possibly a link to the community post, they should get back to you.

Just curious, did get fixed?

It was corrected. This was addressed in version 1.5.7. It should be available for update through the public External Module repo.

[HebelPierre]

Thanks a lot for these correction !!!!! Great !!!
For my part, using embedded fields with cross-project piping works well.
So perhaps, delete this comment on documentation :

Note: Field Embedding

The Cross-Project Piping module may not work correctly when interacting with embedded fields.