In Plain Sight
Let’s begin by saying that there are currently two major versions of EndNote: desktop EndNote and online EndNote. The EndNote desktop software stores the program and your citation library locally on your computer. Online EndNote accounts store your citation collection on servers at Thomson Reuters, so you can log onto the web and access the account from anywhere.
Initially the only version of EndNote available was the one you installed on your desktop or laptop computer. In December 2006 the EndNote folks launched a web-based version of EndNote. This was a simplified stripped-down version and was not designed to replace the more comprehensive desktop application. However, EndNote and EndNote Web could exchange citations, so it was possible to work with your citations in EndNote Web off-campus, later moving them into desktop EndNote. The citations were stored on the web so you could access them wherever you were, either on or off campus.
In 2013 EndNote Web became EndNote Basic, and was made available as a free web-based application. Though allowing you to create bibliographies in MS Word, Basic is still a stripped down version of the desktop software, offering, for example, only 20 of the most popular bibliographic styles.
To make matters a little more confusing there are now three types of online EndNote account: one is linked to the EndNote desktop program; another is associated with a Web of Knowledge/Science site and the third is the free Basic account which is not associated with either of these. So campuses such as UCSF which subscribe to Web of Science/Knowledge have access to a version of EndNote Basic that has considerably more features than the generic Basic. The following two articles summarize the difference between these versions:
- EndNote Online from the Adept Scientific website.
- EndNote comparison on the EndNote website: note that UCSF users should check WEB OF KNOWLEDGE to see which features are available and go to the Web of Science site to create an account.
One of the challenges that is often brought up with regards to publishing in open access journals is the perceived low quality of some of these journals and the belief that they are not peer reviewed. Open access (OA) is an access and business model, and does not by nature indicate whether a publication is peer-reviewed or not. The Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) is a comprehensive resource which indexes over 9,500 peer-reviewed, scholarly OA journals, as reported by publishers and reviewed by DOAJ.
A recent sting operation by journalist John Bohannon for Science magazine tested just what kind of peer review was conducted by 304 open access journals he submitted a spoof article to. Bohannon used a phony name and affiliation and a wrote a purposely flawed article with errors that should have been easily caught by an editor or reviewer who was doing their job. Of the 255 decisions the author received by press time, 157 were acceptances and 98 rejections. This experiment clearly raises red flags about some OA publishers and the level of peer review they are conducting. Since the targeted journals use a “gold” OA model, whereby a publication charge is paid by the author, there is also a legitimate concern about authors paying for a service they are not actually receiving.
Over the last five years, as OA publishing has become more accepted and pervasive, the number of OA publishers and publications has ballooned. Many OA journals have built a good reputation through their editorial boards and quality of output, and are indexed in PubMed and Web of Science. Meanwhile others raise doubts amongst scrupulous scholars who get bombarded with emails from journals urging authors to submit their articles or to serve on editorial boards.
As with any subscription journal, it is important for scholars to investigate unfamiliar OA journals and to use their best judgement when deciding where to submit their articles. The UCSF Library recommends following the guidelines outlined here, including a review of the caliber of the journal and whether it has been included in trusted sources of information.
The Science sting has put some important concerns to the test, but its results probably aren’t surprising to anyone who is familiar with the quality publications in their field. Several OA publishers that are popular with UCSF researchers, namely BioMed Central, Frontiers, Hindawi, Libertas Academica, and PLOS, were among the 98 that rejected the paper. Bohannon’s article has been widely criticized for singling out gold OA journals, and not using a control group of subscription journals. Without comparable results from subscription journals or from OA journals that do not charge a fee, it is difficult to draw conclusions about the practices of gold OA journals as compared to other publication models.
One of the positive results Bohannon’s experiment is likely to have is to tighten the standards for vetting OA publications. Both the DOAJ and OASPA have made statements to this effect in response to the sting, and in fact the DOAJ had already drafted revised inclusion criteria. And scholars will undoubtedly continue to use scrutiny when selecting what journals to publish in.
UCSF librarians have put together Subject Guides to guide you to the most important UCSF resources and suggest tips and search strategies for finding and using information. Use these pages to find resources (article databases, catalogs, background information, web sites, and more) on your topic.
Topics include: Biochemistry; Chemistry; Electronic Books at UCSF; EndNote, RefWorks and Related Software; Laboratory Animal Science and Welfare; Medical Microbiology; Medicine; Mobile Apps and Resources; Nursing; Pharmacy and Pharmacology.
On September 23rd Mendeley announced the release of its updated app for the iPad and iPhone. New features include the ability to create and edit highlights and notes on iPhone and iPad devices. You can read more about the new release here. The app can be downloaded for free from iTunes.
As usual with new software apps there are still a few bugs to be fixed. If you’re having problems, with the new iOS7 for example, you can check out the Mendeley support blog for help.
Neither EndNote nor RefWorks can “read” citations from an existing bibliography in a Word document not formatted using a citation management application. An earlier post described methods to transfer references to an EndNote library from a bibliography formatted in Word. However, there is another way to do this using a free online service called WizFolio which can easily convert a pre-existing bibliography into an RIS-formatted file. You then import the RIS file into EndNote or RefWorks.
Here are the steps:
1. Go to the WizFolio home page:
2. Select Sign Up Now and create a free Wizfolio account. Once you have the account, you can log in back at the home page:
3. Open your Word document and select your entire bibliography:
4. In your WizFolio account hold your mouse over the Add icon toward the top center of the Wizfolio window. Select Import from Clipboard:
5. Paste your text into the box that opens. You should see Wizfolio inserting blank lines between the references in your bibliography:
6. After WizFolio has inserted the spaces, click the Import Now button in the lower right corner of the page. WizFolio will attempt to locate and import records from PubMed and other sources:
7. Select all the citations you’ve just imported. Click the Export button at the top of the page then select Export to RIS:
8. Save the file. It will be called MyReferences.ris.
1. Open EndNote.
2. Locate the MyReferences.ris file and open it. It should import directly into EndNote:
3. If it does not directly import into Endnote, import using the Import function using Reference Manager (RIS) as your Import Option.
1. Import using the Import function , selecting RIS Format
Be certain to check that all the information has been correctly imported.
If you’re using EndNote you might want to know what’s been happening in the EndNote world over the past few months and if there are any new developments making citing references and document formatting easier.
EndNote X7 (desktop version) for Windows and the Mac was released over the summer. A major new feature for Windows users is an EndNote plug-in for adding citations and reference lists to Microsoft PowerPoint slides. It seems that it’s not available for Mac users at the moment.
Free basic version of EndNote. EndNote Basic is a free online version of EndNote, and was formerly known as EndNote Web. It provides users with the ability to store 50,000 references, 2GB of file storage, 21 bibliographic styles, 5 online search connectors, and 9 import filters. With EndNote Basic you can create groups which you can share with others. It is also possible to link the desktop version to the web version, allowing you to synchronize your libraries.
EndNote on the iPad. There is a recently released EndNote app for the iPad. This synchronizes with the web version. If you’re interested the app is on sale until September 30.
On July 24, 2013, the University of California became the largest academic institution to adopt an open access policy. UC’s Academic Council passed the policy, which strives to make all of UC’s scholarly article output freely accessible to the public (see the press release). This policy applies to UC’s 8,000 faculty and the 40,000 peer-reviewed journal articles they publish every year.
The UC policy comes a little more than a year after UCSF passed its own open access policy. UCSF’s Academic Senate endorsed the UC policy, but opted to continue abiding by the terms in the pre-existing UCSF policy. The two policies are virtually identical but for two points: UCSF’s policy is restricted to non-commercial use, and authors must deposit an archival copy even if they opt out of the license for an article.
The premise of the OA Policy is that faculty have granted a license to the University of California prior to any contractual arrangement with publishers. This license allows faculty members to deposit the final versions of published papers in an open access repository such as eScholarship and to re-use their work for various purposes. Authors are still free to publish in whichever journals they choose.
Faculty on three campuses (UCLA, UCI and UCSF) will begin depositing articles in eScholarship on November 1, 2013. The California Digital Library and the UC Libraries are investigating tools to streamline the workflow for faculty. For more information, see:
Have a question? Send it to firstname.lastname@example.org.
The Internet and its associated tools have begun to change how scientists can more effectively share information. One such social networking site you may have heard of is ResearchGate, an academic social networking site for doctors, PhDs. and scientists, offering tools and applications to allow users to interact and collaborate more effectively. The site has been described as a mash-up of Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn.
Scientists can set up and populate ResearchGate profiles with their real names, professional details and publications — data that the site uses to suggest connections with other members. Users can create public or private discussion groups, and share papers and lecture materials. A new portal encourages scientists to post both positive and negative results and data so that you can find out what does and does not work – an obvious advantage over current journals which only publish positive results.
Click here if you want to find out more about ResearchGate and how this and other social networking sites will change the way you work.
Summer arrives and with it comes the latest EndNote update. This year it’s version X7, though so far it’s only available for the Windows platform. Mac users will have to wait for the fall.
What’s new in X7? You can read more about X7 here though one important new feature is the ability for Windows users to add citations and reference links to PowerPoint slides:
You can also watch a short Youtube video.
UCSF affiliates can download a discounted copy of X7 from onthehub.com.
iPad users should be reminded that an app has been released for the iPad and is now on sale until July 31st.
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/endnote-for-ipad/id593994211?mt=8 to view and purchase in iTunes.
See EndNote for iPad for more information http://endnote.com/ipad.
Those of you who boldly pay the buck and try it, please comment here with your experiences.
Recent revelations about much data is shared with the government has focused attention on just how many websites and services track what we do on the Internet. One of the biggest companies to do this is Google. If you don’t want Google and other major search engines to know so much about you, then you should consider using alternative search engines that protect privacy.
One search engine that’s growing in popularity is DuckDuckGo:
(The name is supposedly derived from the children’s game Duck, duck, goose.) It’s main draw is that unlike Google it doesn’t track what you’re doing or collect or share personal information. Here are search results for ibuprofen:
Some background reading: The surprising ways that Google can track everything that you do online