Add Reviewed status to Study, Experiment, Signature exports

[cmirzayi]

Currently the exports produced by BugSigDB have two variables that appear to track the status of a study/experiment/signature:

State (Possible Values: Complete, Incomplete)
Reviewer (Possible Values: username who completed the review or blank if not reviewed)

While Reviewer implies that the study/experiment/signature has been marked as reviewed, I would like to have a field that directly states that the study/experiment/signature has been reviewed.

From my (naive) perspective, there are two possible implementations:

1. Update the State field to have three values: Complete, Incomplete, Reviewed (not sure if this creates issues if something is both incomplete and reviewed which shouldn't happen but I acknowledge could happen.)
2. Add an additional field called Reviewed with two possible values: TRUE, FALSE (or yes/no or really whatever is easiest)

We have no strong preferences for one over the other so I would say whichever is easier to implement. If there is a different approach, we can consider that as well. We'd like this for all study, experiment, and signature exports.

Thank you.

[tosfos]

What is the goal of this new field? The reviewer value comes from the review page, and if it exists, that proves that the review happened.

Also, note the following about the review system:

1. It is possible that a Review can be marked "Incomplete" and it refers to the state of the Review (not the data itself).
2. The review can become stale if the page was modified after the review date.

[lwaldron]

I think the goal would be to allow downstream filtering of data with stale or incomplete reviews. I would add to this, the Quality Control flags. Not a high priority since we can get most of the way their just by filtering on presence of a non-Wikiworks reviewer, but would be nice to have.

[tosfos]

OK. Let's put this on hold for a bit while we work on more pressing issues.

[lwaldron]

Bumping this as a priority for Y8. It is necessary trust infrastructure already, as we have large numbers of unreviewed pages, including some that were created by bulk upload. To summarize the issue:

• Export existing Study-level QC flags (e.g., "Retracted paper", "Contamination issues suspected", "Batch effect issues suspected") in Study exports with filterable columns