.jpg){kind=link}
- Published
- Updated
A results table exported by an instrument may not contain everything needed to understand a measurement later. Raw signals, processing settings or unsuccessful attempts can remain in separate files or local databases outside the routine research delivery.
Preserve the meaning of data
Map the path from measurement to usable result for the particular instrument and intended use. Identify which records represent original observations and which represent derived outputs. Explain how important context in supporting files or local databases will be retained and who may access it. File extension alone does not determine an authoritative record’s role.
Worked example
For example, an instrument exports only accepted results to a spreadsheet, while earlier attempts and rerun reasons remain locally. The team traces a selected result to its raw record and processing settings. It identifies review questions left unanswered by retaining only the successful result and assembles an appropriate linked record package.
Review checks
- Trace a result to the relevant raw observation and processing settings.
- Check where unsuccessful or repeated attempts are retained.
- Test interpretability of a representative record without its supporting files.
Acceptance and boundaries
Acceptance means necessary measurement context stays accessible and understandable within the study’s record arrangements. Not every technical file from every device needs identical retention; choose important records according to use and risk. Vendor explanations inform that judgement. Long-term access includes the knowledge and suitable reader needed to interpret a record, as well as the ability to open its file.
Frequently asked questions
- Is a results spreadsheet always sufficient?
- No. Assess whether context needed for reconstruction remains outside that table.
- Are processing details unnecessary when raw data exist?
- No. They may be needed to explain how the raw observation became the result actually used.