Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Better handling of no-article-found case #1312

Open
maxkfranz opened this issue Nov 21, 2024 · 1 comment
Open

Better handling of no-article-found case #1312

maxkfranz opened this issue Nov 21, 2024 · 1 comment

Comments

@maxkfranz
Copy link
Member

maxkfranz commented Nov 21, 2024

Description

Q: What is the name of the feature?

A: Better handling of no-article-found case

Q: What does this feature enable the user to do?

A: Enter article details when article not found in Pubmed / Biorxiv.

Q: What information must the user provide to use the feature?

A:

  • Author list / first & last (free text)
  • Article title (already provided)
  • Journal name
  • Year

Q: What are the applicable constraints, e.g. compatibility or performance?

A:

  • Everything but the author list is simple
  • The author list could be formatted in lots of different ways (e.g. comma-separated, semicolons, initials, middle name...)
  • Just do free text (good for display only) for author list and show as-is until populated by cron

Q: How does this feature affect each class of user (persona)?

A:

  • Biologist:
  • Editor:
  • Computational biologist:
  • Curator:

Specification

Mockup

Version A. Add "journal"

Add a Journal input to the existing popup in the editor.

  • Pros
    • Removes a lot of guesswork
  • Cons
    • Still missing year, authors
      • Used in matching algorithms
Screenshot 2024-11-27 at 4 36 09 PM

Version B. Fall-back when unable to find match

When unable to match author's article, fall-back to a form with more fields.

  • Cons
    • More work for an author
  • Pros
    • We reuse current form (which generally works) and only use this in rare case of unmatched
Screenshot 2024-11-27 at 4 41 24 PM

Version C. Supplement detail at validation

Only raise an issue at the submission stage (like pathway validation) and ask for more details here.

  • Cons
    • More work at the end when they're impatient...
  • Pros
    • We reuse current form (which generally works) and only use this in rare case of unmatched
Screenshot 2024-11-27 at 4 44 52 PM

Details

@jvwong
Copy link
Member

jvwong commented Nov 26, 2024

As we are piloting with Nature Cell Biology, I looked back at their last 3 issues (Volume 26, Issues 9-11) to get a sense of the relationship between preprints and the version of record/publication. In this period, where were N=34 research articles published.

The take home message Most published NCB research articles won't have a preprint, and for those that do, the titles won't be the same. Only 4/34 articles had a preprint with the same title. You mileage may vary depending on the journal.

Notes:


1. How long does it take for an accepted NCB article to end up on PubMed?

2. What proportion of NCB articles had an associated preprint?

3. For NCB articles with a preprint (N=15), what is the period between the posting and PubMed indexing?

4. For NCB articles with a preprint, how often are the titles identical?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants