NCT04730349 — SoA extraction uncertainty report

Prompt: PDF_TO_JSON_PROMPT v3.8.1, run in one pass without stopping. Source: NCT04730349_soa.pdf (16 PDF pages = document pages 27–42, per PAGEMAP.md). No protocol markdown was provided, so all text comes from the PDF text layer and was checked against rendered pages.

Decisions needed (3)

# where call made alternative detail
D1 p.31, Table 2-2 row 4 (Targeted Physical Examination…), Day 8 cell (col 5), marker * The Notes-cell line "At Day 8 visits collect vital signs only." is its own annotation *, bound to the Day 8 cell that shows "X". The rest of that Notes cell is annotation n1, bound to the activity. Keep the whole Notes cell, including the * line, as one activity-level note (n1). The * would then stay only as a mark on the cell. 3.3
D2 p.37, Table 2-2 row 29 (Oral Hydration Follow-up), col 4 "X (Day 3-5)" is recorded only in the Cycle 1 Day 5 column (col 4), where it is printed. The rule line between Day 3 and Day 5 is present in that row, so this is not a merged cell. The qualifier stays in the cell text. Treat "(Day 3-5)" as naming the Cycle 1 Day 3 and Day 5 columns, and spread the X over cols 3:4. 3.2
D3 p.31, Table 2-2 header rows 1–2 The cycle-length lines ("Cycle = 3 wks", "Each cycle = 3 wks") and the visit windows ("± 1 day", "- 1 day") stay inside the cycle and day header cells. This gives two header properties (cycle, study_day). Split them out into separate header properties (a cycle-length row and a window row). 3.1

Recorded, not open (7)

1. Per-table summary

Table Source type pages data cols activities (incl. headers) activity rows per page
1 Table 2-1 Screening Procedural Outline main_soa 28–30 1 (pos 2) 21 28: 12 · 29: 6 · 30: 3
2 Table 2-2 On-treatment Procedural Outline main_soa 31–38 6 (pos 2–7) 27 31: 4 · 32: 4 · 33: 2 · 34: 4 · 35: 5 · 36: 6 · 37: 2 · 38: 0
3 Table 2-3 Long-term Follow-up Period main_soa 39–42 4 (pos 2–5) 19 39: 7 · 40: 3 · 41: 3 · 42: 6

3.1 Header structure (Table 2)

3.2 Merged-mark decisions

The spans were confirmed from 200-dpi raster rule lines: the internal vertical rules are missing across each span. - Table 2, span 3:7 (the Cycle 1 Day 1 column stays empty, and its rule line is present): row 6 AE Assessment ("Continuously"), row 7 Concomitant Medication Use ("Continuously"), row 12 Body Imaging (bullet text), row 13 Brain Imaging (bullet text), row 14 CSF - Solid tumors, row 15 Bone Marrow- Solid tumors, row 16 CSF - Leukemia, row 17 Bone Marrow - Leukemia, rows 19–21 PK/Immunogenicity samples ("See Section 9.5.1 for further details."), row 23 PRO ("See Notes"). - Table 3, span 2:5: row 13 Body Imaging, row 14 Brain Imaging, row 15 CSF ("As clinically indicated."), row 16 Bone marrow aspirate ("As clinically indicated"), rows 19–20 PK and Immunogenicity samples. - Oral Hydration Follow-up (T2 row 29): every rule line is present, so the mark is a single cell in col 4 (see D2).

3.3 Synthesised items

4. Mechanical mark-check

5. Annotation text integrity

6. Source defects / orphan risk

7. Method provenance