Case Review SOP — Pyze Execution Intelligence

Regulatory Context QC review is the last line of defense before external regulatory submission.

Why this SOP is audit-grade Every step below is captured at the DOM element level (button labels, field IDs, section panels) — not as screenshot coordinates. Every metric is derived from 617 real events across 198 cases, with confidence and case evidence visible per step.

Step Journey

Click a task to see the application journey on the same case, then click an application to drill into the execution detail Pyze captured for it.

Level 2 · Application Journey

Review SAE Case — 10 apps touched within ±15 min of this task on the same case

Case counts per app are not mutually exclusive — a case that touched both Veeva and Phobos in this window is counted in both rows. Overlap reflects real cross-app work, not double-counted cases.

Level 3 · Execution Detail

Veeva Safety

DOM-level capture

Pyze JS captures every element interaction — button labels, field IDs, section panels.

pyzeClick <span> "Complete" 273×

pyzeClick <a> "Show more" 196×

pyzeClick <li> "Narrative" 173×

pyzeClick <span> "Continue" 161×

pyzeClick <li> "Details" 157×

pyzeClick <li> "Delete" 143×

pyzeClick <li> "Unknown" 133×

pyzeClick <span> "Adverse Events" 127×

Level 3 · Execution Detail

Phobos

DOM-level capture

Pyze JS captures every element interaction — button labels, field IDs, section panels.

pyzeClick <button> "Proceed" 76×

pyzeClick <select> "Select Attachment description · Legal · Legal Pre-Sca" 52×

pyzeClick <button> "Advance" 48×

pyzeClick <button> "Save Comments" 44×

inputld <select> "Select Attachment description · Legal · Legal Pre-Sca" 38×

pyzeClick <a> "Cases" 35×

pyzeClick <div> "Please reply to “Request Information" using dropd" 34×

pyzeClick <button> "Send to process" 28×

Level 3 · Execution Detail

Microsoft Word

Document-level capture

Task Mining captures the specific file open during work — file names often encode case context.

file V-Narrative 552979 (English) (26689105_0_2_348832) 1453×

file V-Narrative 549707 (English) (26645831_0_1_347236) 636×

file V-Narrative 549550 (English) (26643764_0_1_347593) 526×

file V-Narrative 531284 (English) (26355806_0_2_340584) 225×

file V-Narrative 525025 (English) (26253159_0_3_342205) 211×

file V-Narrative 546801 (English) (26597391_0_2_345463) 187×

file V-Narrative 541572 (English) (26508302_0_1_342423) 174×

file V-Narrative 542162 (English) (26518018_0_1_342783) 168×

Level 3 · Execution Detail

Microsoft Teams

App-level capture

Only application name and dwell time available. Direct instrumentation would unlock deeper detail.

1,688 granular events captured, but no DOM, document, or message-level metadata is available for this application. Instrumenting this app directly with Pyze would unlock element-level detail.

Level 3 · Execution Detail

Acrobat

App-level capture

Only application name and dwell time available. Direct instrumentation would unlock deeper detail.

1,574 granular events captured, but no DOM, document, or message-level metadata is available for this application. Instrumenting this app directly with Pyze would unlock element-level detail.

Level 2 · Application Journey

Review SUSAR Case — 10 apps touched within ±15 min of this task on the same case

Level 3 · Execution Detail

Veeva Safety

DOM-level capture

Pyze JS captures every element interaction — button labels, field IDs, section panels.

pyzeClick <span> "Complete" 179×

pyzeClick <span> "Narrative" 123×

pyzeClick <span> "Adverse Events" 105×

pyzeClick <a> "Show more" 91×

pyzeClick <span> "Submissions & Distributions" 72×

pyzeClick <button> "Create" 66×

pyzeClick <li> "Narrative" 64×

pyzeClick <span> "Reference Numbers" 60×

Level 3 · Execution Detail

Phobos

DOM-level capture

Pyze JS captures every element interaction — button labels, field IDs, section panels.

pyzeClick <button> "Proceed" 65×

pyzeClick <button> "Save Comments" 56×

pyzeClick <select> "Select Attachment description · Legal · Legal Pre-Sca" 42×

pyzeClick <button> "Send to process" 33×

inputld <select> "Select Attachment description · Legal · Legal Pre-Sca" 32×

pyzeClick <div> "Please reply to “Request Information" using dropd" 30×

pyzeClick <button> "Advance" 23×

pyzeClick <a> "Cases" 23×

Level 3 · Execution Detail

Microsoft Word

Document-level capture

Task Mining captures the specific file open during work — file names often encode case context.

file V-Narrative 533164 (English) (26378749_0_4_342805) 659×

file V-Narrative 534252 (English) (26399499_0_2_343143) 515×

file V-Narrative 543823 (English) (26544362_0_2_343646) 514×

file V-Narrative 540591 (English) (26495494_0_2_345212) 429×

file V-Narrative 553016 (English) (26689302_0_2_348778) 392×

file V-Narrative 528191 (English) (26300681_0_1_338349) 377×

file V-Narrative 530932 (English) (26349278_0_2_339374) 366×

file V-Narrative 555782 (English) (26733642_0_2_350941) 205×

Level 3 · Execution Detail

Acrobat

App-level capture

Only application name and dwell time available. Direct instrumentation would unlock deeper detail.

2,046 granular events captured, but no DOM, document, or message-level metadata is available for this application. Instrumenting this app directly with Pyze would unlock element-level detail.

Level 3 · Execution Detail

collaboration.merck.com

App-level capture

Only application name and dwell time available. Direct instrumentation would unlock deeper detail.

363 granular events captured, but no DOM, document, or message-level metadata is available for this application. Instrumenting this app directly with Pyze would unlock element-level detail.

Level 2 · Application Journey

Open Combined Review — 10 apps touched within ±15 min of this task on the same case

Level 3 · Execution Detail

Veeva Safety

DOM-level capture

Pyze JS captures every element interaction — button labels, field IDs, section panels.

pyzeClick <span> "Complete" 24×

pyzeClick <span> "Narrative" 17×

pyzeClick <a> "Show more" 17×

pyzeClick <span> "Submissions & Distributions" 12×

pyzeClick <span> "Workflow Timeline" 11×

pyzeClick <span> "Products" 11×

pyzeClick <span> "Reference Numbers" 10×

pyzeClick <span> "Study" 10×

Level 3 · Execution Detail

Phobos

DOM-level capture

Pyze JS captures every element interaction — button labels, field IDs, section panels.

pyzeClick <a> "Cases" 50×

pyzeClick <a> "Review" 46×

pyzeClick <a> "Cases Coordinator" 41×

pyzeClick <button> "Proceed" 40×

pyzeClick <a> "Review Coordinator" 40×

pyzeClick <button> "Send to process" 38×

pyzeClick <a> "Inbox" 37×

pyzeClick <a> "Inbox Coordinator" 36×

Level 3 · Execution Detail

Acrobat

App-level capture

Only application name and dwell time available. Direct instrumentation would unlock deeper detail.

128 granular events captured, but no DOM, document, or message-level metadata is available for this application. Instrumenting this app directly with Pyze would unlock element-level detail.

Level 3 · Execution Detail

Microsoft Teams

App-level capture

Only application name and dwell time available. Direct instrumentation would unlock deeper detail.

55 granular events captured, but no DOM, document, or message-level metadata is available for this application. Instrumenting this app directly with Pyze would unlock element-level detail.

Level 3 · Execution Detail

ONENOTE

Document-level capture

Task Mining captures the specific file open during work — file names often encode case context.

No detail captured for this app. Consider direct Pyze instrumentation.

Standard Flow

Representative application journey — the dominant app-to-app transitions observed in the pilot data. Tier badge shows how deeply Pyze captures each application.

Veeva Safety

DOM

3,364 events · 188 cases

Phobos

DOM

588 events · 69 cases

Veeva Safety

DOM

3,364 events · 188 cases

Microsoft Teams

App

97 events · 37 cases

Veeva Safety

DOM

3,364 events · 188 cases

Dominant transitions chained from real observations. Specific case journeys appear as variants below. Use the Step Journey above to drill into any task.

Step Variants

Distinct task-sequence patterns observed across cases in this step. Click a variant on the left to see its task sequence, business impact, and recommended remediations on the right.

Reference Case Review (step-level) Reference Path 163 cases · 11 analysts · 2× same-task rework

Task Sequence

1. Review SAE Case

Automated Explanation rule-based

This is the mined reference path — 163 instances across 11 analysts follow this exact sequence. Treat as the proposed Standard Operating Procedure for Case Review (step-level).

Reviewer Sweep Reviewer Verification Pass 82 cases · 8 analysts

Task Sequence

1. Review SUSAR Case

Automated Explanation rule-based

Reviewer Sweep — a viewing-heavy pattern with 13.3 avg sub-steps and zero edits captured. Consistent with a downstream reviewer re-opening the task to verify earlier work rather than progressing new data. 8 analysts across 82 cases.

Time

362 hrs/yr

Cost

$27,150/yr

At 1,000

21,294 hrs/yr

Amendment Spiral Post-Amendment Rework 11 cases · 2 analysts · 2× same-task rework

Task Sequence

1. Open Combined Review

Automated Explanation rule-based

Amendment Spiral — multiple analysts (2) revisit the same activities on the same cases (11), consistent with rework triggered by case version bumps (v2.0 → v3.0). Suggests either upstream intake issues driving amendments, or downstream rework after review feedback.

Backfill Loop Mid-Flow Data Backfill 3 cases · 1 analysts · 5× same-task rework

Task Sequence

1. Review SUSAR Case → 2. Open Combined Review → 3. Review SUSAR Case

Automated Explanation rule-based

Backfill Loop — instances revisit the same activity 5.0× on average, consistent with mid-flow detours to fetch or enter data that wasn't ready at the right step. Ordering issue, not an app issue — 1 analysts across 3 cases. Suggests upstream data readiness or UX sequencing is at fault.

Time

9 hrs/yr

Cost

$675/yr

At 1,000

529 hrs/yr

Reviewer Sweep Reviewer Verification Pass 3 cases · 1 analysts · 2× same-task rework

Task Sequence

1. Review SUSAR Case → 2. Open Combined Review

Automated Explanation rule-based

Reviewer Sweep — a viewing-heavy pattern with 12.3 avg sub-steps and zero edits captured. Consistent with a downstream reviewer re-opening the task to verify earlier work rather than progressing new data. 1 analysts across 3 cases.

Backfill Loop Mid-Flow Data Backfill 2 cases · 2 analysts · 5× same-task rework

Task Sequence

1. Review SAE Case → 2. Review SUSAR Case

Automated Explanation rule-based

Backfill Loop — instances revisit the same activity 5.0× on average, consistent with mid-flow detours to fetch or enter data that wasn't ready at the right step. Ordering issue, not an app issue — 2 analysts across 2 cases. Suggests upstream data readiness or UX sequencing is at fault.

Time

5 hrs/yr

Cost

$375/yr

At 1,000

294 hrs/yr

Backfill Loop Mid-Flow Data Backfill 1 cases · 1 analysts · 8× same-task rework

Task Sequence

1. Review SAE Case → 2. Open Combined Review → 3. Review SAE Case

Automated Explanation rule-based

Backfill Loop — instances revisit the same activity 8.0× on average, consistent with mid-flow detours to fetch or enter data that wasn't ready at the right step. Ordering issue, not an app issue — 1 analysts across 1 cases. Suggests upstream data readiness or UX sequencing is at fault.

Backfill Loop Mid-Flow Data Backfill 1 cases · 1 analysts · 9× same-task rework

Task Sequence

1. Open Combined Review → 2. Review SAE Case → 3. Open Combined Review → 4. Review SAE Case → 5. Open Combined Review

Automated Explanation rule-based

Backfill Loop — instances revisit the same activity 9.0× on average, consistent with mid-flow detours to fetch or enter data that wasn't ready at the right step. Ordering issue, not an app issue — 1 analysts across 1 cases. Suggests upstream data readiness or UX sequencing is at fault.

Time

109 hrs/yr

Cost

$8,175/yr

At 1,000

6,412 hrs/yr

Reviewer Sweep Reviewer Verification Pass 1 cases · 1 analysts · 2× same-task rework

Task Sequence

1. Review SUSAR Case → 2. Review SAE Case → 3. Open Combined Review

Automated Explanation rule-based

Reviewer Sweep — a viewing-heavy pattern with 17.0 avg sub-steps and zero edits captured. Consistent with a downstream reviewer re-opening the task to verify earlier work rather than progressing new data. 1 analysts across 1 cases.

📄

Detailed Step Reference

Full DOM element detail + case evidence for every step (3 total) — mostly for BA and RPA-developer use

Review SAE Case

View SAE Case None

373 observations 168 cases 11 analysts Median 47.0s 100% high confidence

Review SUSAR Case

View SUSAR Case None

269 observations 91 cases 8 analysts Median 100.0s 100% high confidence

Open Combined Review

View Combined Review None

53 observations 20 cases 2 analysts Median 1.0s 100% high confidence

Top Application Transitions

Top app-to-app hops observed during this stage. Each pair is a single swivel-chair move, ranked by frequency.

Rank	From App		To App	Cases	Frequency	Share
1	Veeva Safety DOM	→	Phobos DOM	53	105	23.8%
2	Phobos DOM	→	Veeva Safety DOM	54	104	23.5%
3	Microsoft Word Document	→	Veeva Safety DOM	25	69	15.6%
4	Veeva Safety DOM	→	Microsoft Teams App	36	59	13.3%
5	Veeva Safety DOM	→	Microsoft Word Document	22	56	12.7%
6	Microsoft Teams App	→	Veeva Safety DOM	29	49	11.1%

Path Variants

Top 10 full application journeys observed through this stage (consecutive duplicates collapsed). Shows the actual end-to-end paths cases take — not just single transitions.

Rank	Hops	Application sequence	Cases	Share of cases
1	1	Veeva Safety DOM	100	50.5%
2	1	Phobos DOM	10	5.1%
3	3	Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM	5	2.5%
4	3	Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM	5	2.5%
5	7	Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM	3	1.5%
6	5	Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM	2	1.0%
7	3	Veeva Safety DOM → Quality Vault DOM → Veeva Safety DOM	2	1.0%
8	9	Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM	1	0.5%
9	15	Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM → Microsoft Excel Document → Veeva Safety DOM → TextInputHost App → collaboration.merck.com App → Veeva Safety DOM → collaboration.merck.com App → Acrobat App → Veeva Safety DOM → Microsoft Excel Document → Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM	1	0.5%
10	83	Veeva Safety DOM → Microsoft Excel Document → Acrobat App → Veeva Safety DOM → collaboration.merck.com App → Veeva Safety DOM → Acrobat App → YoudaoDict App → Veeva Safety DOM → YoudaoDict App → Veeva Safety DOM → MEDDRABROWSERWIN App → Veeva Safety DOM → CelonisTaskMining.Client App → Veeva Safety DOM → Acrobat App → collaboration.merck.com App → Veeva Safety DOM → MEDDRABROWSERWIN App → Veeva Safety DOM → MEDDRABROWSERWIN App → Veeva Safety DOM → Microsoft Word Document → Veeva Safety DOM → Microsoft Teams App → Veeva Safety DOM → Microsoft Excel Document → Microsoft Teams App → Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → Acrobat App → Veeva Safety DOM → collaboration.merck.com App → Veeva Safety DOM → Acrobat App → YoudaoDict App → Veeva Safety DOM → Microsoft Word Document → Microsoft Excel Document → Veeva Safety DOM → MEDDRABROWSERWIN App → newtab App → Veeva Safety DOM → Acrobat App → Veeva Safety DOM → Acrobat App → Veeva Safety DOM → Microsoft Word Document → Veeva Safety DOM → Microsoft Word Document → Veeva Safety DOM → Acrobat App → Veeva Safety DOM → Microsoft Word Document → Veeva Safety DOM → Acrobat App → Microsoft Word Document → Acrobat App → Microsoft Word Document → Veeva Safety DOM → Microsoft Outlook Message → Microsoft Word Document → Veeva Safety DOM → Microsoft Word Document → Acrobat App → Microsoft Word Document → Acrobat App → Microsoft Word Document → Acrobat App → Microsoft Word Document → Acrobat App → Microsoft Word Document → Veeva Safety DOM → Microsoft Word Document → Veeva Safety DOM → Microsoft Excel Document → Veeva Safety DOM → Microsoft Word Document → Veeva Safety DOM → Microsoft Excel Document → Veeva Safety DOM → Microsoft Word Document → Veeva Safety DOM	1	0.5%

A "1-hop" path means the case stayed in a single application for this stage. Longer paths indicate cross-app work — those are the ones to investigate for swivel-chair reduction opportunities.

Applications Footprint

Where work actually happens during this stage. Cross-app time flags potential integration or UX opportunities.

Application	Capture tier	Events	Cases touched	Avg dwell per event	Total minutes in stage
Veeva Safety	DOM	562	182	0.49s	4.6 min
Phobos	DOM	55	20	0s	0 min

Drift Monitoring

Compares observed behavior against the published SOP. Drift signals feed compliance events and trigger automatic SOP refresh.

Drift level

High

Top path concentration

76.8%

Distinct transitions

Emerging steps

Unstable steps

Rare apps

Uneven adoption apps

Emerging activities (not in standard flow)

Activity	Frequency	Cases	Action
View Vaccine SAE Case	19	3	Candidate for SOP inclusion · Promote to step →
View SAE Case Reference	15	10	Candidate for SOP inclusion · Promote to step →
View Blinded SAE Case	11	5	Candidate for SOP inclusion · Promote to step →
View HPV SAE Case	11	4	Candidate for SOP inclusion · Promote to step →
View MMR SAE Case	8	2	Candidate for SOP inclusion · Promote to step →

Rare apps (used on <15% of cases)

Application	Capture tier	Cases using	Events	% of cases	Action
Microsoft Excel	Document	29	62	14.6%	Shadow tool signal · Flag for investigation →
Microsoft Word	Document	26	117	13.1%	Shadow tool signal · Flag for investigation →
collaboration.merck.com	App	26	75	13.1%	Shadow tool signal · Flag for investigation →
Microsoft Outlook	Message	20	35	10.1%	Shadow tool signal · Flag for investigation →
ONENOTE	Document	10	10	5.1%	Shadow tool signal · Flag for investigation →
Notepad	App	10	17	5.1%	Shadow tool signal · Flag for investigation →
Quality Vault	DOM	8	15	4.0%	Shadow tool signal · Flag for investigation →
olk	Message	6	8	3.0%	Shadow tool signal · Flag for investigation →

Uneven adoption apps (used by minority of analysts)

Application	Analysts using	Total events	Adoption	Action
collaboration.merck.com	5	75	38.0%	Training or knowledge-transfer opportunity · Review users →
usc-excel.officeapps.live.com	1	35	8.0%	Training or knowledge-transfer opportunity · Review users →
Microsoft Outlook	5	35	38.0%	Training or knowledge-transfer opportunity · Review users →
Notepad	1	17	8.0%	Training or knowledge-transfer opportunity · Review users →
evocpr01.apps.americas.cf.merck.com	1	16	8.0%	Training or knowledge-transfer opportunity · Review users →
Quality Vault	4	15	31.0%	Training or knowledge-transfer opportunity · Review users →

Continuous monitoring active This SOP reflects observed behavior through the 19-day pilot. In production, drift signals are checked hourly and published SOPs auto-refresh when consensus shifts. Drift events appear in the admin audit log with a diff against the previous version.

Case Review

Tasks in this Step

Publish to QualityDocs

Step Journey

Standard Flow

Step Variants

Review SAE Case

Review SUSAR Case

Open Combined Review

Top Application Transitions

Path Variants

Applications Footprint

Drift Monitoring

Emerging activities (not in standard flow)

Rare apps (used on <15% of cases)

Uneven adoption apps (used by minority of analysts)