1. Common Sense Validation Using SAS Lisa Eckler Lisa Eckler Consulting Inc. TASS Interfaces, December 2015

2. Common Sense Validation Using SAS Holistic approach Allocate most effort to what’s most important Avoid or automate repetitive tasks Ask ourselves the right questions

3. Common Sense Validation Using SAS Defining terms: QA Data quality assurance is the process of profiling the data to discover inconsistencies, and other anomalies in the data and performing data cleansing activities to improve the data quality. – Wikipedia

4. Common Sense Validation Using SAS Defining terms: Verification Verification is the act of reviewing, inspecting, testing, etc. to establish and document that a product, service, or system meets the regulatory, standard, or specification requirements.  Does it meet the structural requirements?  Is it complete ?

5. Common Sense Validation Using SAS Defining terms: Validation Validation refers to meeting the needs of the intended end-user or customer.  Does it answer the user’s question?  Does it meet all of the needs?  Structure and completeness, data integrity, appropriateness

6. Common Sense Validation Using SAS – Pablo Picasso “Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.”

7. Common Sense Validation Using SAS How do I know if I got it right?

8. Common Sense Validation Using SAS Is Validation a programming task?  Yes – mostly  The routine parts can and should be automated and repeatable  That leaves more resources for the parts which require human attention

9. Common Sense Validation Using SAS  PROC COMPARE  PROC CONTENTS  PROC CONTENTS with compare (using PROC COMPARE or TRANSPOSE, MERGE and flag)  PROC FREQ +/- PROC FORMAT  PROC SUMMARY  PROC SUMMARY + compare (using PROC COMPARE or TRANSPOSE, MERGE and flag)

10. Common Sense Validation Using SAS  PROC COMPARE  PROC CONTENTS  PROC CONTENTS with compare (using PROC COMPARE or TRANSPOSE, MERGE and flag)  PROC FREQ +/- PROC FORMAT  PROC SUMMARY  PROC SUMMARY + compare (using PROC COMPARE or TRANSPOSE, MERGE and flag) Wrap a macro around this and you have a flexible, re-usable tool!

11. Common Sense Validation Using SAS Does this mean writing more SAS code after I thought I was finished writing SAS code? Yes… and no We can save time and improve the quality of results by using code that isn’t part of the final program. Don’t think of it as disposable, though: this code can be set up once and saved to use for all future validation efforts. Additional benefits Automated validation provides a log Easily repeatable

12. Common Sense Validation Using SAS What are the questions? Should this be a replication of something I have seen before? If not, is it similar to something I’ve done before? Is it – or some part of it – supposed to be different from anything I’ve seen before? Is the result packaged properly?

13. Common Sense Validation Using SAS Mantra for Validation Check your assumptions Confirm similarities Focus on differences

14. Common Sense Validation Using SAS How is this result expected to compare with what we’ve seen before? Entirely differentSome overlap Complete overlap Subset

15. Common Sense Validation Using SAS Some possibilities – not an exhaustive list!

16. Common Sense Validation Using SAS ** This is the simplest form of **; ** comparison between two sets of data **; proc compare compare = SHOES base = OLD_SHOES; run ;

17. Common Sense Validation Using SAS

18. ** PROC CONTENTS gives us metadata **; proc contents data = OLD_SHOES; run ;

19. Common Sense Validation Using SAS

20. ** CONTENTS with select facts saved to **; ** a data set --> a table of metadata **; proc contents data = OLD_SHOES out = CONTENTS_OLD_SHOES (keep=name type length); run ;

21. Common Sense Validation Using SAS ** Same as previous slide except for the **; ** new data set **; proc contents data = NEW_SHOES out = CONTENTS_NEW_SHOES (keep=name type length); run ;

22. Common Sense Validation Using SAS ** Comparing metadata tables rather than **; ** data tables **; proc compare compare = CONTENTS_OLD_SHOES base = CONTENTS_NEW_SHOES; run ;

23. Common Sense Validation Using SAS

25. proc contents data = OLD_SHOES out = CONTENTS1(keep=name type length); run ; proc contents data = NEW_SHOES out = CONTENTS2(keep=name type length); run ; proc compare compare = CONTENTS1 base = CONTENTS2; run ;

26. Common Sense Validation Using SAS %macro COMPARE_STRUCTURE1 ; proc contents data = OLD_SHOES out = CONTENTS1(keep=name type length); run; proc contents data = NEW_SHOES out = CONTENTS2(keep=name type length); run; proc compare compare = CONTENTS1 base = CONTENTS2; run; %mend COMPARE_STRUCTURE1; % COMPARE_STRUCTURE1 ;

27. Common Sense Validation Using SAS %macro COMPARE_STRUCTURE(DS1,DS2); proc contents data = &DS1 out = CONTENTS1(keep=name type length); run; proc contents data = &DS2 out = CONTENTS2(keep=name type length); run; proc compare compare = CONTENTS1 base = CONTENTS2; run; %mend COMPARE_STRUCTURE; % COMPARE_STRUCTURE (OLD_SHOES, NEW_SHOES);

28. Common Sense Validation Using SAS %macro COMPARE_STRUCTURE(DS1,DS2); proc contents data = &DS1 out = CONTENTS1(keep=name type length); run; proc contents data = &DS2 out = CONTENTS2(keep=name type length); run; proc compare compare = CONTENTS1 base = CONTENTS2; run; %mend COMPARE_STRUCTURE; % COMPARE_STRUCTURE (OLD_SHOES, NEW_SHOES);

29. Common Sense Validation Using SAS ** We've just built a generic tool for comparing **; ** the STRUCTURE of any two SAS data sets **; % COMPARE_STRUCTURE (, );

30. Common Sense Validation Using SAS Reasonableness: complete overlap

31. Common Sense Validation Using SAS Reasonableness: complete overlap “_character_” gives the list of ALL vars in the table with data type character, which may include some vars with too many values

32. Common Sense Validation Using SAS Reasonableness: complete overlap This code also gives a list of ALL vars in the table with data type character

33. Common Sense Validation Using SAS Reasonableness: complete overlap The above code lets us customize our list to exclude non-categorical character columns and include the others

34. Common Sense Validation Using SAS Reasonableness: complete overlap

35. Common Sense Validation Using SAS Reasonableness: complete overlap

36. Common Sense Validation Using SAS Reasonableness: complete overlap Similar to the way we compared the structure of two tables, we can compare the frequency counts of values in two tables

37. Common Sense Validation Using SAS proc compare compare = OLD_SHOES base = NEW_SHOES; run ;  Judicious use of unrestricted PROC COMPARE -- after confirming reasonableness Data correctness: complete overlap

38. Common Sense Validation Using SAS If we are expecting a result that is a complete replication of something that already exists Confirm that the structure is identical Confirm that the data is the same at a high level Confirm that the data is the same at a detailed level  fully automated

39. Common Sense Validation Using SAS What if we don’t have an existing results table to compare to? Similar SAS data in an existing table or produced by someone else? Similar data in some other format that can be imported into SAS for comparison? Do we have a data requirements document? The truly original data will require much greater attention to validation and the involvement of a subject matter expert Data correctness: completely new

40. Common Sense Validation Using SAS Packaging: completely new

41. Common Sense Validation Using SAS Assuming we have a Requirements “document”… Import REQUIREMENTS into SAS data set run PROC CONTENTS on new data set to get CONTENTS_NEW_SHOES run PROC COMPARE, comparing CONTENTS_NEW_SHOES to REQUIREMENTS OR Join REQUIREMENTS with CONTENTS_NEW_SHOES and flag non-matching rows Packaging: completely new

42. Common Sense Validation Using SAS Packaging: completely new

43. Common Sense Validation Using SAS Packaging: completely new

44. Common Sense Validation Using SAS Reasonableness: completely new

45. Common Sense Validation Using SAS Reasonableness: completely new

46. Common Sense Validation Using SAS

47. What if part of our result should be the same as an existing result but there should be some differences? Treat it as a hybrid and split the validation exercise into two parts Expected same (by rows, columns, data or metadata) Expected different (by rows, columns, data or metadata)

48. Common Sense Validation Using SAS For each of the two parts Confirm (expected) similarities Focus efforts on (expected) differences Run the validation procedures we’ve alreay looked at as appropriate for the “same” and “different” aspects

49. Common Sense Validation Using SAS Recall the scenario where our data sets should be identical record _id abc 1*** 2*** 3*** abc 1*** 2*** 3***

50. Common Sense Validation Using SAS record _id abc 1** 2** 3** abd 1** 2** 3** When some columns should be the same 50

51. Common Sense Validation Using SAS record _id abc 1** 2** 3** abd 1** 3** 4 When some “cells” (parts of rows and columns) should be the same

52. Common Sense Validation Using SAS Review:

53. Common Sense Validation Using SAS Summary:  Ask the right questions  Confirm similarities with known things – quickly and programmatically – then focus time and effort on validating “unknown” or new things  Basic base SAS procedures for validation  vary the technique based on how much is similar/different from what you’ve validated previously and what types of data are involved

54. Common Sense Validation Using SAS You can find my related conference papers at www.lexjansen.com www.lexjansen.com Don’t Forget About Small Data (SESUG 2015) When Good Looks Aren’t Enough (NESUG 2009) If you have comments or questions… lisa.eckler@sympatico.ca