New operator request to check sequential ordering and absence of skips.

[eljanssens]

unit-test-sequential SEQ_Negative.xlsx

Problem:
The operator 'is_ordered_set' currently doesn't check skips in numbering. It does check if for example: --SEQ is completed sequentially, but it doesn't check that a number is missing in the sequence. See attached test data: LB has a number skip in --SEQ but it is not picked up if you would write:

Check:
all:
- name: --SEQ
operator: is_not_ordered_set
value: USUBJID

Possible solution
Would it be possible to create an additional operator that is an extension on 'is_ordered_set/is_not_ordered_set' so that includes checking for skips as well?

[gerrycampion]

@eljanssens is this for a particular rule?

[eljanssens]

@gerrycampion: this is not related to a particular CDISC conformance rule but came up during programming of CG0620 and CG0662: '--SEQ is in a consistent chronological order
CDISC doesn't require to have no skips in the numbering, but we want to include this in a custom rule. We've discussed this in a previous meeting and it was agreed to create another operator for this that checks that there are no skips between the numbers. This is an operator that will be usefull for the industry.