[ENH][SCHEMA] Adding an OPTIONAL _task-<label> to structural MRI acquisitions

[melanieganz]

As was discussed in:

• #1177

it is of interest to add the OPTIONAL _task-<label> to the structural MRI specifications to allow for task such as pre-described motion paradigms.

[Remi-Gau]

• "Instructions" seems to be another metadata field

From a quick browse into the other I don't see how the others task related field could make sense here (cog atlas ID, cog paradigm ontology ID...) but I may be wrong...

[melanieganz]

Dear all,

thanks all for your feedback! I think we need to discuss this further before adapting it somehow and added some more questions back our discussion. Let me know what you think.

[Remi-Gau]

To move forward on this, I would suggest a dividing and conquer approach.

Let's focus on adding in this PR "task" to "anat" without any example.

This should include the typical metadata usually associated with task.

@melanieganz i will a task list in the top message of this PR.

Then we can keep discussing the suggested example in the associated PR.

[melanieganz]

So you want to approve the above and merge? If you find more people that approve, I am all on board. :-)

[Remi-Gau]

So you want to approve the above and merge? If you find more people that approve, I am all on board. :-)

OK to approve once those metadata are added

[melanieganz]

Sorry everyone, I have been out travelling and then started teaching and tyhis is why this has been hanging. I am trying to resolve it this week. But I might ping @Remi-Gau and @bendhouseart to help with this PR GitHub mess. Since I am "all powerful" as steering group member in this repo I don't want to mess things up, because I am doing things wrong. ;-)

[melanieganz]

Dear all, I now added the recommended metadata that @Remi-Gau asked for:

• DONE TaskName
• DONE TaskDescription
• DONE Instructions I added it directly after the mentioning of task in anatomical imaging and I shortened the descriptions so no mentions of task are there. Are they too close to the section on 'Task (including resting state) imaging data'?

I think there is a small issue in the macro for the TaskName remaining. It automatically states: For example "TaskName" "faces n-back" will correspond to task label facesnback. Maybe we can agree to take this out of the Macro and add it or make a more general formulation in the macro tables. I will recommend this change also.

[melanieganz]

I made a proposed change to the TaskName example in order to not make it only focused on functional MRI, let me know if that makes sense to you or not, see here.

[Remi-Gau]

The table is looking funky. Let me see check this.

[Remi-Gau]

The table is looking funky. Let me see check this.

OK this got fixed by a line skip after the macro.

[Remi-Gau]

• Are they too close to the section on 'Task (including resting state) imaging data'?

Not a problem for me. In case we reorganize things one day those things could then end up very far apart.

[Remi-Gau]

Maybe we can agree to take this out of the Macro and add it or make a more general formulation in the macro tables. I will recommend this change also.

The change you have made makes sense to me.

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

Base: 88.65% // Head: 88.65% // No change to project coverage :thumbsup:

Coverage data is based on head (f80f8ea) compared to base (ec7a5ad). Patch has no changes to coverable lines.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #1185   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   88.65%   88.65%           
=======================================
  Files          11       11           
  Lines        1084     1084           
=======================================
  Hits          961      961           
  Misses        123      123           

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

:umbrella: View full report at Codecov.
:loudspeaker: Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

[melanieganz]

Dear all,

can we move forward with this? For your info, I have uploaded my dataset now https://openneuro.org/datasets/ds004332/versions/1.0.2 using runs instead of task and I think if you look at it, you'll see how confusing this gets. So I would still like to push this task addition.

@TheChymera can you please chime in on this again?

[effigies]

Alright. Two checkmarks and no blocks, let's merge.