Intake SOP — Pyze Execution Intelligence

Regulatory Context Intake accuracy governs downstream case lifecycle timing — late or incomplete intake compounds into SUSAR reporting delays that are regulated under ICH E2D and FDA 21 CFR 314.80.

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 2,753 real events across 465 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

Receive Intake — 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" 984×

pyzeClick <a> "Show more" 362×

pyzeClick <li> "Narrative" 260×

pyzeClick <span> "Narrative" 225×

pyzeClick <span> "Adverse Events" 203×

pyzeClick <li> "Details" 191×

pyzeClick <span> "Approval Complete" 171×

pyzeClick <span> "Submissions & Distributions" 144×

Level 3 · Execution Detail

Phobos

DOM-level capture

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

pyzeClick <button> "Proceed" 648×

pyzeClick <select> "Select Attachment description · Legal · Legal Pre-Sca" 404×

pyzeClick <button> "Save Comments" 374×

pyzeClick <button> "Advance" 319×

pyzeClick <button> "Send to process" 313×

inputld <select> "Select Attachment description · Legal · Legal Pre-Sca" 272×

pyzeClick <a> "Cases" 204×

pyzeClick <select> "Select Compound · - sitagliptin phosphate Tablet (G" 194×

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 528191 (English) (26300681_0_1_338349) 382×

file V-Narrative 553023 (English) (26689066_0_2_351253) 247×

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

file V-Narrative 545329 (English) (26567747_0_2_344796) 215×

file V-Narrative 538518 (English) (26459147_0_1_344628) 198×

file V-Narrative 525091 (English) (26253532_0_1_338428) 197×

file V-Narrative 531868 (English) (26362311_0_1_340534) 185×

Level 3 · Execution Detail

Acrobat

App-level capture

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

2,776 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.

2,082 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

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

Level 3 · Execution Detail

Phobos

DOM-level capture

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

pyzeClick <select> "Select Attachment description · Legal · Legal Pre-Sca" 469×

inputld <select> "Select Attachment description · Legal · Legal Pre-Sca" 308×

pyzeClick <button> "Proceed" 269×

pyzeClick <button> "Save Comments" 229×

pyzeClick <button> "Push to Case Processing" 133×

pyzeClick <select> "Select Compound · - sitagliptin phosphate Tablet (G" 129×

pyzeClick <button> "Advance" 97×

pyzeClick <button> "Send to process" 97×

Level 3 · Execution Detail

Veeva Safety

DOM-level capture

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

pyzeClick <span> "Adverse Events" 73×

pyzeClick <span> "Complete" 70×

pyzeClick <a> "Show more" 59×

pyzeClick <span> "Products" 42×

pyzeClick <li> "Details" 38×

pyzeClick <span> "Narrative" 35×

pyzeClick <li> "Narrative" 33×

pyzeClick <span> "Case Assessment Results" 33×

Level 3 · Execution Detail

RIM Vault

DOM-level capture

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

pyzeClick <span> "Continue" 11×

pyzeClick <div> "This report requires you to complete the report v" 6×

pyzeClick <span> "Agreement Documents" 4×

pyzeClick <a> "Kelun (SKB) MK-2870, MK-2870 (with MK-3475) & MK-" 4×

pyzeClick <div> "Products" 2×

pyzeClick <a> "Reports" 2×

pyzeClick <a> "Consortium Agreement NCI MK-3475" 2×

pyzeClick <a> "Kelun" 2×

Level 3 · Execution Detail

collaboration.merck.com

App-level capture

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

437 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.

532 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

Verify Routing — 10 apps touched within ±15 min of this task on the same case

Level 3 · Execution Detail

Phobos

DOM-level capture

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

pyzeClick <select> "Select Attachment description · Legal · Legal Pre-Sca" 191×

pyzeClick <button> "Proceed" 130×

pyzeClick <button> "Send to process" 117×

pyzeClick <button> "Save Comments" 110×

inputld <select> "Select Attachment description · Legal · Legal Pre-Sca" 109×

pyzeClick <a> "Inbox" 85×

pyzeClick <a> "Cases" 80×

pyzeClick <a> "Inbox Coordinator" 76×

Level 3 · Execution Detail

Veeva Safety

DOM-level capture

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

pyzeClick <span> "Complete" 81×

pyzeClick <a> "Show more" 51×

pyzeClick <span> "Narrative" 50×

pyzeClick <span> "Adverse Events" 45×

pyzeClick <span> "Case Assessment Results" 34×

pyzeClick <span> "Submissions & Distributions" 33×

pyzeClick <div> "Case: 2353948 (v0.1) - SAE - pembrolizumab Soluti" 31×

pyzeClick <span> "Products" 31×

Level 3 · Execution Detail

collaboration.merck.com

App-level capture

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

106 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 Outlook

Message-level capture

Task Mining captures email subjects. Case numbers frequently appear in the subject line.

subj <Due today><Void request><GPVCM POLAND> Case # 2326062 23×

subj <Due today><Void request><GPVCM POLAND> Case # 4×

subj FW: [Confidential] <BP Clarification> Case Number 2345589; MCN PY2012025US0056; BP: Pyxis Oncology ; Country 4×

subj ivermectin license in Portugal 2×

Level 3 · Execution Detail

Microsoft Teams

App-level capture

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

401 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 Pre-Routing Queue — 5 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 <a> "Show more" 3×

pyzeClick <span> "Narrative" 2×

pyzeClick <div> "Case Entry · Show less · 24 Nov 2025 · Instructions · · Pl" 2×

pyzeClick <a> "Inbox" 2×

pyzeClick <span> "Patient" 2×

pyzeClick <li> "Products (3)" 1×

pyzeClick <div> "Name · Primary · Rank · Event (Reported) · Event (Reporte" 1×

pyzeClick <div> "Primary Reporter Provided Consent · Unknown · Transmi" 1×

Level 3 · Execution Detail

Phobos

DOM-level capture

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

inputld <select> "= · != · < · >" 5×

pyzeClick <button> "Proceed" 4×

pyzeClick <a> "Inbox" 3×

pyzeClick <button> "Release cases (1)" 2×

pyzeClick <div> "Routed to DMC: 790" 1×

pyzeClick <button> "Release cases (55)" 1×

pyzeClick <button> "Route to DMC >>" 1×

inputld <select> "LIKE · = · !=" 1×

Level 3 · Execution Detail

Microsoft Teams

App-level capture

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

10 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 Excel

Document-level capture

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

file 2329445 (v2.1) 339×

file Case tracking list 1×

Level 3 · Execution Detail

gpteal.merck.com

DOM-level capture

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

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.

Phobos

DOM

5,303 events · 465 cases

Veeva Safety

DOM

6,060 events · 229 cases

Phobos

DOM

5,303 events · 465 cases

Microsoft Teams

App

162 events · 62 cases

Veeva Safety

DOM

6,060 events · 229 cases

Microsoft Word

Document

342 events · 66 cases

Veeva Safety

DOM

6,060 events · 229 cases

Acrobat

App

296 events · 50 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 Intake (step-level) Reference Path 244 cases · 8 analysts · 4× same-task rework

Task Sequence

1. Receive Intake

Automated Explanation rule-based

This is the mined reference path — 244 instances across 8 analysts follow this exact sequence. Treat as the proposed Standard Operating Procedure for Intake (step-level).

Reviewer Sweep Reviewer Verification Pass 29 cases · 5 analysts

Task Sequence

1. Begin Case Processing

Automated Explanation rule-based

Reviewer Sweep — a viewing-heavy pattern with 4.1 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. 5 analysts across 29 cases.

Backfill Loop Mid-Flow Data Backfill 27 cases · 7 analysts · 14× same-task rework

Task Sequence

1. Begin Case Processing → 2. Receive Intake

Automated Explanation rule-based

Backfill Loop — instances revisit the same activity 14.0× 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 — 7 analysts across 27 cases. Suggests upstream data readiness or UX sequencing is at fault.

Time

432 hrs/yr

Cost

$32,400/yr

At 1,000

25,412 hrs/yr

Backfill Loop Mid-Flow Data Backfill 12 cases · 4 analysts · 4× same-task rework

Task Sequence

1. Begin Case Processing → 2. Receive Intake → 3. Begin Case Processing

Automated Explanation rule-based

Backfill Loop — instances revisit the same activity 4.0× 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 — 4 analysts across 12 cases. Suggests upstream data readiness or UX sequencing is at fault.

Backfill Loop Mid-Flow Data Backfill 11 cases · 6 analysts · 4× same-task rework

Task Sequence

1. Begin Case Processing → 2. Receive Intake → 3. Begin Case Processing → 4. Receive Intake

Automated Explanation rule-based

Backfill Loop — instances revisit the same activity 4.0× 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 — 6 analysts across 11 cases. Suggests upstream data readiness or UX sequencing is at fault.

Time

1,775 hrs/yr

Cost

$133,125/yr

At 1,000

104,412 hrs/yr

Backfill Loop Mid-Flow Data Backfill 10 cases · 4 analysts · 5× same-task rework

Task Sequence

1. Receive Intake → 2. Verify Routing → 3. Receive Intake

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 — 4 analysts across 10 cases. Suggests upstream data readiness or UX sequencing is at fault.

Time

520 hrs/yr

Cost

$39,000/yr

At 1,000

30,588 hrs/yr

Reviewer Sweep Reviewer Verification Pass 9 cases · 3 analysts

Task Sequence

1. Receive Intake → 2. Verify Routing

Automated Explanation rule-based

Reviewer Sweep — a viewing-heavy pattern with 4.2 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. 3 analysts across 9 cases.

Reviewer Sweep Reviewer Verification Pass 6 cases · 3 analysts · 2× same-task rework

Task Sequence

1. Verify Routing → 2. Receive Intake

Automated Explanation rule-based

Reviewer Sweep — a viewing-heavy pattern with 5.2 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. 3 analysts across 6 cases.

Backfill Loop Mid-Flow Data Backfill 5 cases · 2 analysts · 4× same-task rework

Task Sequence

1. Begin Case Processing → 2. Receive Intake → 3. Begin Case Processing → 4. Verify Routing → 5. Receive Intake → 6. Verify Routing

Automated Explanation rule-based

Backfill Loop — instances revisit the same activity 4.0× 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 5 cases. Suggests upstream data readiness or UX sequencing is at fault.

📄

Detailed Step Reference

Full DOM element detail + case evidence for every step (4 total) — mostly for BA and RPA-developer use

Receive Intake

Phobos Activity None

1,378 observations 431 cases 8 analysts Median 2.0s 100% high confidence

Begin Case Processing

View Intake Processing None

640 observations 171 cases 7 analysts Median 6.0s 100% high confidence

Verify Routing

View Intake Routed None

262 observations 122 cases 7 analysts Median 0s 100% high confidence

Review Pre-Routing Queue

View Intake Pre-Routing None

8 observations 5 cases 3 analysts Median 7.0s 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	223	470	30.6%
2	Phobos DOM	→	Veeva Safety DOM	215	449	29.3%
3	Microsoft Word Document	→	Veeva Safety DOM	59	172	11.2%
4	Veeva Safety DOM	→	Microsoft Word Document	55	162	10.6%
5	Acrobat App	→	Veeva Safety DOM	44	153	10.0%
6	Veeva Safety DOM	→	Acrobat App	43	129	8.4%

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	Phobos DOM	225	48.4%
2	3	Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM	57	12.3%
3	5	Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM	26	5.6%
4	9	Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM	11	2.4%
5	7	Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM	10	2.2%
6	2	Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM	3	0.6%
7	4	Phobos DOM → collaboration.merck.com App → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM	2	0.4%
8	3	Phobos DOM → Quality Vault DOM → Phobos DOM	2	0.4%
9	4	Phobos DOM → Microsoft Outlook Message → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM	2	0.4%
10	11	Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM	2	0.4%

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
Phobos	DOM	2,753	465	2.21s	101.3 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

38.3%

Distinct transitions

Emerging steps

Unstable steps

Rare apps

Uneven adoption apps

Rare apps (used on <15% of cases)

Application	Capture tier	Cases using	Events	% of cases	Action
Microsoft Word	Document	66	342	14.2%	Shadow tool signal · Flag for investigation →
Microsoft Teams	App	62	162	13.3%	Shadow tool signal · Flag for investigation →
Acrobat	App	50	296	10.8%	Shadow tool signal · Flag for investigation →
Microsoft Outlook	Message	44	78	9.5%	Shadow tool signal · Flag for investigation →
Microsoft Excel	Document	43	112	9.2%	Shadow tool signal · Flag for investigation →
collaboration.merck.com	App	34	65	7.3%	Shadow tool signal · Flag for investigation →
ONENOTE	Document	15	23	3.2%	Shadow tool signal · Flag for investigation →
Quality Vault	DOM	11	16	2.4%	Shadow tool signal · Flag for investigation →

Uneven adoption apps (used by minority of analysts)

Application	Analysts using	Total events	Adoption	Action
RIM Vault	2	72	14.0%	Training or knowledge-transfer opportunity · Review users →
ONENOTE	3	23	21.0%	Training or knowledge-transfer opportunity · Review users →
TextInputHost	3	21	21.0%	Training or knowledge-transfer opportunity · Review users →
MEDDRABROWSERWIN	2	20	14.0%	Training or knowledge-transfer opportunity · Review users →
gpteal.merck.com	5	19	36.0%	Training or knowledge-transfer opportunity · Review users →
usc-excel.officeapps.live.com	1	15	7.0%	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.

Intake

Tasks in this Step

Publish to QualityDocs

Step Journey

Standard Flow

Step Variants

Receive Intake

Begin Case Processing

Verify Routing

Review Pre-Routing Queue

Top Application Transitions

Path Variants

Applications Footprint

Drift Monitoring

Rare apps (used on <15% of cases)

Uneven adoption apps (used by minority of analysts)