The-Strategy-Unit / The-Strategy-Unit/nhp_model_databricks
Review results aggregations for PBM
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Jupyter Notebook
- Stars
- 0
- Forks
- 1
- Avg merge
- 1d 21h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 1
Description
Review aggregations in OP for PBM - do we need the same levels of aggregation in results for PBM as we do for provider level? We could for example only provide age_group not age in PBM results, or tretspef_grouped not tretspef
Current aggregations mean that OP data is too big to run in PBM - we're having to make compromises e.g. with https://github.com/The-Strategy-Unit/nhp_model/pull/473
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by reviewing the OP aggregations and PBM results, using pull request #473 as context for the current data-size compromises. Compare the required aggregation levels and agree which dimensions PBM should retain; the work is done when PBM can run without those compromises and the chosen levels are reflected in the results.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- jupyter-notebook
- Domain
- data-engineering
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100