import XPT file into SAS OnDemand Studio

[Ksharp]

Tom,
" CPORT transport file format " is not a real XPT file . FDA would not accept it
As you said , federal agency (CDC NHANES) is usually prefer V5 XPT ,not V8 XPT file.

[Tom]

---

@Ksharp wrote:
Tom,
" CPORT transport file format " is not a real XPT file . FDA would not accept it
As you said , federal agency (CDC NHANES) is usually prefer V5 XPT ,not V8 XPT file.

---

 The XPT extension has no fixed file format associated with it.   The CPORT transport file is a transport file. That is the point I was making. Whether or not the FDA would accept it does not matter.   

[Ksharp]

That is not ture.
In the Pharamacy field ,Especially for sas programmer ,you only can use v5(most time) or v8 xpt file,
Not the file generated by PROC CPORT (which can make any suffix ,like .xpt .bat .tom .ksharp).

If you are in other field other than Pharmacy, you can use PROC CPORT to transport your sas datasets, but in Pharmacy ,you can't .

[Tom]

---

@Ksharp wrote:
That is not ture.
In the Pharamacy field ,Especially for sas programmer ,you only can use v5(most time) or v8 xpt file,
Not the file generated by PROC CPORT (which can make any suffix ,like .xpt .bat .tom .ksharp).

If you are in other field other than Pharmacy, you can use PROC CPORT to transport your sas datasets, but in Pharmacy ,you can't .

---

I have been in the field for 30 years and I can tell you have seen thousands of CPORT files of clinical dataset that have been created with .XPT as the file extension.

[Ksharp]

OK.
Then Why did federal agency (CDC NHANES / FDA) usually posted V5 XPT ,not the file generated by PROC CPORT ?
Since the file generated by PROC CPORT has many advantage than V5 XPT (like V8 XPT,no limited 8-byte variable name,no limited 200 of character variable).
Then Why did SAS create a new macro %loc2xpt to create V8 XPT ,since there is already PROC CPORT ?

[Tom]

---

@Ksharp wrote:
OK.
Then Why did federal agency (CDC NHANES / FDA) usually posted V5 XPT ,not the file generated by PROC CPORT ?
Since the file generated by PROC CPORT has many advantage than V5 XPT (like V8 XPT,no limited 8-byte variable name,no limited 200 of character variable).
Then Why did SAS create a new macro %loc2xpt to create V8 XPT ,since there is already PROC CPORT ?

---

More non-sequiturs.

The reason that the FDA requested V5 transport files is they prefer to use published standard formats.  SAS published to format of the V5 transport files.  And when SAS enhanced the format to support longer names and longer variables they published that format also.  (Why the heck SAS generates these file using macros instead of making an libname engine I have no idea)  So again the FDA would prefer the receive either of the two formats that SAS has published the specification of.  But whether or not the FDA accepts a particular file format is not  really at all related to the question of what type of file someone has sent you when it is named with an XPT extension or they call it a "transport file".

XPT as an extension is not determinative of the type of file.  Unlike a file with an extension of XLSX or XLS where you are 99% sure that the file is an Excel workbook.  When you have a file with a name 'XPT' or someone says they are sending your a "transport file" you have to always check to be sure what type of file they have actually sent you.

The NIH publishes NHANES data using V5 transport file format.  And they use the XPT as the file naming convention on the NHANES site, but that fact was not readily obvious from the WORDS they published on the site.  "The proof of the pudding is in the eating",  so for the files with NHANES data you have to actually attempt to read (or at least examine) the file to be confident of the file format.

Perhaps if I write it as code it will be easier to understand?

'XPT' ne 'V5 Transport file'
'XPT' ne 'CPORT Transport file'
'XPT' ne '%loc2xpt() generated transport file'
'Transport file' ne 'V5 Transport file'
'Transport file' ne 'CPORT Transport file'
'Transport file' ne '%loc2xpt() generated transport file'

[Ksharp]

Tom,
"But whether or not the FDA accepts a particular file format is not really at all related to the question of what type of file someone has sent you when it is named with an XPT extension or they call it a "transport file". "

Yes. You can use the transport file generated by PROC CPORT at anytime anywhere , as long as you tell receiver to use PROC CIMPORT to import it , that is also called transport file. But that is not standard and not official and can't submit it to FDA .