Triage SOP — Pyze Execution Intelligence

Regulatory Context Triage decisions set the regulatory clock for SUSAR (7/15-day) and non-SUSAR reporting obligations. Incorrect triage either misses reporting deadlines or wastes specialist bandwidth.

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 1,793 real events across 384 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 Processing Queue — 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" 938×

pyzeClick <a> "Show more" 260×

pyzeClick <li> "Narrative" 233×

pyzeClick <li> "Details" 183×

pyzeClick <span> "Narrative" 170×

pyzeClick <span> "Approval Complete" 169×

pyzeClick <span> "Adverse Events" 159×

pyzeClick <span> "Start Approval Workflow" 138×

Level 3 · Execution Detail

Phobos

DOM-level capture

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

pyzeClick <button> "Proceed" 464×

pyzeClick <button> "Advance" 281×

pyzeClick <button> "Save Comments" 250×

pyzeClick <button> "Send to process" 135×

pyzeClick <select> "Select Compound · - sitagliptin phosphate Tablet (G" 130×

pyzeClick <select> "Select Report Type · Legal · Literature · Medical Recor" 119×

pyzeClick <a> "Cases" 115×

pyzeClick <div> "Please reply to “Request Information" using dropd" 109×

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 528191 (English) (26300681_0_1_338349) 382×

file V-Narrative 540591 (English) (26495494_0_2_345212) 294×

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

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

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

file V-Narrative 530120 (English) (26331907_0_1_341282) 186×

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

file V-Narrative 542172 (English) (26517690_0_2_345412) 181×

Level 3 · Execution Detail

Acrobat

App-level capture

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

2,021 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.

1,920 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

Manage Work List — 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" 452×

pyzeClick <a> "Show more" 165×

pyzeClick <span> "Adverse Events" 117×

pyzeClick <span> "Narrative" 108×

pyzeClick <span> "Submissions & Distributions" 93×

pyzeClick <li> "Narrative" 92×

pyzeClick <span> "Products" 86×

pyzeClick <span> "Case Assessment Results" 83×

Level 3 · Execution Detail

Phobos

DOM-level capture

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

pyzeClick <button> "Proceed" 316×

pyzeClick <button> "Send to process" 219×

pyzeClick <a> "Cases" 180×

pyzeClick <button> "Save Comments" 172×

pyzeClick <button> "Advance" 140×

pyzeClick <a> "Cases Coordinator" 129×

pyzeClick <select> "Select Attachment description · Legal · Legal Pre-Sca" 127×

pyzeClick <a> "Inbox" 103×

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 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 542172 (English) (26517690_0_2_345412) 181×

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

file V-Narrative 530716 (English) (26341165_0_2_337732) 159×

file V-Narrative 524911 (English) (26250161_0_1_339456) 142×

Level 3 · Execution Detail

Acrobat

App-level capture

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

1,283 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.

990 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.

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

3,655 events · 384 cases

Veeva Safety

DOM

5,835 events · 212 cases

Phobos

DOM

3,655 events · 384 cases

Microsoft Teams

App

167 events · 57 cases

Veeva Safety

DOM

5,835 events · 212 cases

Microsoft Word

Document

334 events · 73 cases

Veeva Safety

DOM

5,835 events · 212 cases

Acrobat

App

265 events · 52 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 Triage (step-level) Reference Path 115 cases · 8 analysts · 2× same-task rework

Task Sequence

1. Manage Work List

Automated Explanation rule-based

This is the mined reference path — 115 instances across 8 analysts follow this exact sequence. Treat as the proposed Standard Operating Procedure for Triage (step-level).

Reviewer Sweep Reviewer Verification Pass 109 cases · 7 analysts · 2× same-task rework

Task Sequence

1. Review Processing Queue

Automated Explanation rule-based

Reviewer Sweep — a viewing-heavy pattern with 3.8 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. 7 analysts across 109 cases.

Time

509 hrs/yr

Cost

$38,175/yr

At 1,000

29,941 hrs/yr

Backfill Loop Mid-Flow Data Backfill 48 cases · 7 analysts · 4× same-task rework

Task Sequence

1. Manage Work List → 2. Review Processing Queue

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 — 7 analysts across 48 cases. Suggests upstream data readiness or UX sequencing is at fault.

Time

960 hrs/yr

Cost

$72,000/yr

At 1,000

56,471 hrs/yr

Backfill Loop Mid-Flow Data Backfill 30 cases · 6 analysts · 3× same-task rework

Task Sequence

1. Review Processing Queue → 2. Manage Work List

Automated Explanation rule-based

Backfill Loop — instances revisit the same activity 3.0× 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 30 cases. Suggests upstream data readiness or UX sequencing is at fault.

Time

50 hrs/yr

Cost

$3,750/yr

At 1,000

2,941 hrs/yr

Backfill Loop Mid-Flow Data Backfill 26 cases · 7 analysts · 5× same-task rework

Task Sequence

1. Review Processing Queue → 2. Manage Work List → 3. Review Processing Queue

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 — 7 analysts across 26 cases. Suggests upstream data readiness or UX sequencing is at fault.

Time

190 hrs/yr

Cost

$14,250/yr

At 1,000

11,176 hrs/yr

Backfill Loop Mid-Flow Data Backfill 16 cases · 6 analysts · 3× same-task rework

Task Sequence

1. Manage Work List → 2. Review Processing Queue → 3. Manage Work List

Automated Explanation rule-based

Backfill Loop — instances revisit the same activity 3.0× 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 16 cases. Suggests upstream data readiness or UX sequencing is at fault.

Time

15 hrs/yr

Cost

$1,125/yr

At 1,000

882 hrs/yr

Backfill Loop Mid-Flow Data Backfill 14 cases · 5 analysts · 3× same-task rework

Task Sequence

1. Manage Work List → 2. Review Processing Queue → 3. Manage Work List → 4. Review Processing Queue

Automated Explanation rule-based

Backfill Loop — instances revisit the same activity 3.0× 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 — 5 analysts across 14 cases. Suggests upstream data readiness or UX sequencing is at fault.

Time

1,559 hrs/yr

Cost

$116,925/yr

At 1,000

91,706 hrs/yr

Backfill Loop Mid-Flow Data Backfill 7 cases · 4 analysts · 7× same-task rework

Task Sequence

1. Review Processing Queue → 2. Manage Work List → 3. Review Processing Queue → 4. Manage Work List → 5. Review Processing Queue

Automated Explanation rule-based

Backfill Loop — instances revisit the same activity 7.0× 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 7 cases. Suggests upstream data readiness or UX sequencing is at fault.

Time

177 hrs/yr

Cost

$13,275/yr

At 1,000

10,412 hrs/yr

Backfill Loop Mid-Flow Data Backfill 5 cases · 3 analysts · 4× same-task rework

Task Sequence

1. Manage Work List → 2. Review Processing Queue → 3. Manage Work List → 4. Review Processing Queue → 5. Manage Work List → 6. Review Processing Queue

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 — 3 analysts across 5 cases. Suggests upstream data readiness or UX sequencing is at fault.

Time

130 hrs/yr

Cost

$9,750/yr

At 1,000

7,647 hrs/yr

📄

Detailed Step Reference

Full DOM element detail + case evidence for every step (2 total) — mostly for BA and RPA-developer use

Review Processing Queue

View Processing Queue None

694 observations 269 cases 7 analysts Median 12.0s 100% high confidence

Manage Work List

View Processing Routed None

685 observations 275 cases 8 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	206	418	29.5%
2	Phobos DOM	→	Veeva Safety DOM	198	394	27.8%
3	Microsoft Word Document	→	Veeva Safety DOM	68	177	12.5%
4	Veeva Safety DOM	→	Microsoft Word Document	66	169	11.9%
5	Acrobat App	→	Veeva Safety DOM	48	139	9.8%
6	Veeva Safety DOM	→	Acrobat App	45	119	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	164	42.7%
2	3	Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM	46	12.0%
3	5	Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM	30	7.8%
4	7	Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM	13	3.4%
5	9	Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM	7	1.8%
6	13	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 → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM	2	0.5%
7	3	Phobos DOM → Microsoft Teams App → Phobos DOM	2	0.5%
8	7	Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → Microsoft Word Document → Veeva Safety DOM → Microsoft Outlook Message → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM	2	0.5%
9	4	Phobos DOM → collaboration.merck.com App → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM	1	0.3%
10	9	Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM → Veeva Safety DOM → ONENOTE Document → Veeva Safety DOM → Microsoft Word Document → Veeva Safety DOM → Phobos DOM	1	0.3%

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	1,793	384	0.61s	18.3 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

31.3%

Distinct transitions

Emerging steps

Unstable steps

Rare apps

Uneven adoption apps

Emerging activities (not in standard flow)

Activity	Frequency	Cases	Action
View Re-Routing	215	47	Candidate for SOP inclusion · Promote to step →
Filter Cases	204	100	Candidate for SOP inclusion · Promote to step →
Re-Route Case	20	15	Candidate for SOP inclusion · Promote to step →

Rare apps (used on <15% of cases)

Application	Capture tier	Cases using	Events	% of cases	Action
Microsoft Teams	App	57	167	14.8%	Shadow tool signal · Flag for investigation →
Acrobat	App	52	265	13.5%	Shadow tool signal · Flag for investigation →
Microsoft Outlook	Message	48	90	12.5%	Shadow tool signal · Flag for investigation →
collaboration.merck.com	App	35	64	9.1%	Shadow tool signal · Flag for investigation →
Microsoft Excel	Document	34	78	8.9%	Shadow tool signal · Flag for investigation →
ONENOTE	Document	11	28	2.9%	Shadow tool signal · Flag for investigation →
TextInputHost	App	10	19	2.6%	Shadow tool signal · Flag for investigation →
Notepad	App	10	16	2.6%	Shadow tool signal · Flag for investigation →

Uneven adoption apps (used by minority of analysts)

Application	Analysts using	Total events	Adoption	Action
ONENOTE	3	28	23.0%	Training or knowledge-transfer opportunity · Review users →
RIM Vault	2	24	15.0%	Training or knowledge-transfer opportunity · Review users →
usc-excel.officeapps.live.com	2	20	15.0%	Training or knowledge-transfer opportunity · Review users →
TextInputHost	2	19	15.0%	Training or knowledge-transfer opportunity · Review users →
Notepad	1	16	8.0%	Training or knowledge-transfer opportunity · Review users →
apps.powerapps.com	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.

Triage

Tasks in this Step

Publish to QualityDocs

Step Journey

Standard Flow

Step Variants

Review Processing Queue

Manage Work List

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)