You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I have collated examples of R-Markdown reports from the Technical Group and all of the samples received are embedded HTML reports and are using interactive charts with Plotly (or similar). I had been working on the assumption that PowerPoint was still the default in the NHS (and thus using ggplot/images). Clearly, there are many advantages to the interactive reports and all the feedback relayed has been positive. However, I still feel there is pushback against their use, largely because there are not part of the MS ecosystem and people are worried about how it might be received.
Therefore, I would propose a statement for the Steering Group to agree, similar to the NHS-R community ‘Statement on tools’, endorsing the use of:
HTML format reports (over PowerPoint)
Interactive charts (Plotly)
Quarto (available on UDAL VMs)
This would go a long way to giving NHSE managers the confidence to go with the best technology and move the org to a code-first / open-source way of working.
I have collated examples of R-Markdown reports from the Technical Group and all of the samples received are embedded HTML reports and are using interactive charts with Plotly (or similar). I had been working on the assumption that PowerPoint was still the default in the NHS (and thus using ggplot/images). Clearly, there are many advantages to the interactive reports and all the feedback relayed has been positive. However, I still feel there is pushback against their use, largely because there are not part of the MS ecosystem and people are worried about how it might be received.
Therefore, I would propose a statement for the Steering Group to agree, similar to the NHS-R community ‘Statement on tools’, endorsing the use of:
This would go a long way to giving NHSE managers the confidence to go with the best technology and move the org to a code-first / open-source way of working.
We could collaborate with the NHS-R community on this.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: