Robustifying Links To Combat Reference Rot.
Jones, S. M.; Klein, M.; and Van de Sompel, H.
The Code4Lib Journal, (50). February 2021.
![Robustifying Links To Combat Reference Rot [link]](//bibbase.org/img/filetypes/link.svg "Paper")
Paper
link
bibtex
abstract
@article{jones_robustifying_2021,
title = {Robustifying {Links} {To} {Combat} {Reference} {Rot}},
issn = {1940-5758},
url = {https://journal.code4lib.org/articles/15509},
abstract = {Links to web resources frequently break, and linked content can change at unpredictable rates. These dynamics of the Web are detrimental when references to web resources provide evidence or supporting information. In this paper, we highlight the significance of reference rot, provide an overview of existing techniques and their characteristics to address it, and introduce our Robust Links approach, including its web service and underlying API. Robustifying links offers a proactive, uniform, and machine-actionable way to combat reference rot. In addition, we discuss our reasoning and approach aimed at keeping the approach functional for the long term. To showcase our approach, we have robustified all links in this article.},
language = {en},
number = {50},
urldate = {2021-02-15},
journal = {The Code4Lib Journal},
author = {Jones, Shawn M. and Klein, Martin and Van de Sompel, Herbert},
month = feb,
year = {2021},
keywords = {zfrancophone\_bulletin\_veille},
}
Links to web resources frequently break, and linked content can change at unpredictable rates. These dynamics of the Web are detrimental when references to web resources provide evidence or supporting information. In this paper, we highlight the significance of reference rot, provide an overview of existing techniques and their characteristics to address it, and introduce our Robust Links approach, including its web service and underlying API. Robustifying links offers a proactive, uniform, and machine-actionable way to combat reference rot. In addition, we discuss our reasoning and approach aimed at keeping the approach functional for the long term. To showcase our approach, we have robustified all links in this article.
What Makes A Good Reference Manager? A Quantitative Analysis of Bibliography Management Applications.
Cai, T.; Chen, C.; Huang, T.; and Ritter, F. E
In
Asian CHI Symposium 2021, pages 64–69, New York, 2021. Association for Computing Machinery
Paper
doi
link
bibtex
abstract
@inproceedings{cai_what_2021,
address = {New York},
title = {What {Makes} {A} {Good} {Reference} {Manager}? {A} {Quantitative} {Analysis} of {Bibliography} {Management} {Applications}},
isbn = {978-1-4503-8203-8},
shorttitle = {What {Makes} {A} {Good} {Reference} {Manager}?},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1145/3429360.3468183},
doi = {10.1145/3429360.3468183},
abstract = {Many researchers and students use reference managers to collect, manage, and format references and citations. While prior work has assessed these tools qualitatively, it is still unclear how to quantitatively evaluate reference managers. This paper starts to quantify the user effort required to use reference managers. We first collected surveys from 69 graduate students to understand their experience with reference managers, and then conducted user studies with 12 participants. In our study, each participant was asked to perform a standardized task using four popular reference managers: Mendeley, Zotero, EndNote, and RefWorks. We used RUI, a keystroke and mouse-move logger, to record the participants’ activities and approximate their physical and mental effort. We also used pre- and post-study surveys to collect users’ feedback and self-reported task load (as expressed by the NASA TLX Index.) The results showed that different reference managers require different levels of effort, and users generally prefer the tools that involve less effort. We also found that although reference managers share similar features, differences in presentation and organization matter. We conclude this work by providing a set of guidelines for both users and developers of reference managers.},
urldate = {2021-11-22},
booktitle = {Asian {CHI} {Symposium} 2021},
publisher = {Association for Computing Machinery},
author = {Cai, Tongan and Chen, Chacha and Huang, Ting-Hao and Ritter, Frank E},
year = {2021},
keywords = {zfrancophone\_bulletin\_veille},
pages = {64--69},
}
Many researchers and students use reference managers to collect, manage, and format references and citations. While prior work has assessed these tools qualitatively, it is still unclear how to quantitatively evaluate reference managers. This paper starts to quantify the user effort required to use reference managers. We first collected surveys from 69 graduate students to understand their experience with reference managers, and then conducted user studies with 12 participants. In our study, each participant was asked to perform a standardized task using four popular reference managers: Mendeley, Zotero, EndNote, and RefWorks. We used RUI, a keystroke and mouse-move logger, to record the participants’ activities and approximate their physical and mental effort. We also used pre- and post-study surveys to collect users’ feedback and self-reported task load (as expressed by the NASA TLX Index.) The results showed that different reference managers require different levels of effort, and users generally prefer the tools that involve less effort. We also found that although reference managers share similar features, differences in presentation and organization matter. We conclude this work by providing a set of guidelines for both users and developers of reference managers.
Where to Begin? Thirty must-read papers for newcomers to pharmacoepidemiology.
Pottegård, A.; Morin, L.; Hallas, J.; Gerhard, T.; Winterstein, A. G.; Perez-Gutthann, S.; and Tadrous, M.
Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety, n/a(n/a). November 2021.
Paper
doi
link
bibtex
@article{pottegard_where_2021,
title = {Where to {Begin}? {Thirty} must-read papers for newcomers to pharmacoepidemiology},
volume = {n/a},
issn = {1099-1557},
shorttitle = {Where to {Begin}?},
url = {https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/pds.5382},
doi = {10.1002/pds.5382},
language = {en},
number = {n/a},
urldate = {2021-11-17},
journal = {Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety},
author = {Pottegård, Anton and Morin, Lucas and Hallas, Jesper and Gerhard, Tobias and Winterstein, Almut G. and Perez-Gutthann, Susanna and Tadrous, Mina},
month = nov,
year = {2021},
keywords = {zfrancophone\_bibliogr\_reutilisables, zfrancophone\_bulletin\_veille},
}
Literature Mapper: A QGIS Plugin for Georeferencing Citations in Zotero.
Tobias, M. M; and Mandel, A. I
Air, Soil and Water Research, 14: 117862212110092. January 2021.
Paper
doi
link
bibtex
abstract
@article{tobias_literature_2021,
title = {Literature {Mapper}: {A} {QGIS} {Plugin} for {Georeferencing} {Citations} in {Zotero}},
volume = {14},
copyright = {CC BY-NC 4.0},
issn = {1178-6221, 1178-6221},
shorttitle = {Literature {Mapper}},
url = {http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/11786221211009209},
doi = {10.1177/11786221211009209},
abstract = {Many studies in air, soil, and water research involve observations and sampling of a specific location. Knowing where studies have been previously undertaken can be a valuable addition to future research, including understanding the geographical context of previously published literature and selecting future study sites. Here, we introduce Literature Mapper, a Python QGIS plugin that provides a method for creating a spatial bibliography manager as well as a specification for storing spatial data in a bibliography manager. Literature Mapper uses QGIS’ spatial capabilities to allow users to digitize and add location information to a Zotero library, a free and open-source bibliography manager on basemaps or other geographic data of the user’s choice. Literature Mapper enhances the citations in a user’s online Zotero database with geo-locations by storing spatial coordinates as part of traditional citation entries. Literature Mapper receives data from and sends data to the user’s online database via Zotero’s web API. Using Zotero as the backend data storage, Literature Mapper benefits from all of its features including shared citation Collections, public sharing, and an open web API usable by additional applications, such as web mapping libraries. To evaluate Literature Mapper’s ability to provide insights into the spatial distribution of published literature, we provide a case study using the tool to map the study sites described in academic publications related to the biogeomorphology of California’s coastal strand vegetation, a line of research in which air movement, soil, and water are all driving factors. The results of this exercise are presented in static and web map form. The source code for Literature Mapper is available in the corresponding author’s GitHub repository: https://github.com/MicheleTobias/LiteratureMapper},
language = {en},
urldate = {2021-05-07},
journal = {Air, Soil and Water Research},
author = {Tobias, Michele M and Mandel, Alex I},
month = jan,
year = {2021},
keywords = {zfrancophone\_bulletin\_veille},
pages = {117862212110092},
}
Many studies in air, soil, and water research involve observations and sampling of a specific location. Knowing where studies have been previously undertaken can be a valuable addition to future research, including understanding the geographical context of previously published literature and selecting future study sites. Here, we introduce Literature Mapper, a Python QGIS plugin that provides a method for creating a spatial bibliography manager as well as a specification for storing spatial data in a bibliography manager. Literature Mapper uses QGIS’ spatial capabilities to allow users to digitize and add location information to a Zotero library, a free and open-source bibliography manager on basemaps or other geographic data of the user’s choice. Literature Mapper enhances the citations in a user’s online Zotero database with geo-locations by storing spatial coordinates as part of traditional citation entries. Literature Mapper receives data from and sends data to the user’s online database via Zotero’s web API. Using Zotero as the backend data storage, Literature Mapper benefits from all of its features including shared citation Collections, public sharing, and an open web API usable by additional applications, such as web mapping libraries. To evaluate Literature Mapper’s ability to provide insights into the spatial distribution of published literature, we provide a case study using the tool to map the study sites described in academic publications related to the biogeomorphology of California’s coastal strand vegetation, a line of research in which air movement, soil, and water are all driving factors. The results of this exercise are presented in static and web map form. The source code for Literature Mapper is available in the corresponding author’s GitHub repository: https://github.com/MicheleTobias/LiteratureMapper
Zotero: Annotated Bibliography.
Bartle, L.
March 2021.
Paper
link
bibtex
abstract
@misc{bartle_zotero_2021,
title = {Zotero: {Annotated} {Bibliography}},
copyright = {Copyright John M. Pfau Library 2021},
shorttitle = {Library {Guides}},
url = {https://libguides.csusb.edu/c.php?g=234684&p=1557914},
abstract = {Zotero is a free extension for your web browser that acts as a citation management system. You can save, organize, format your citations in your paper, and more. Download csl files into Zotero, then create an annotated bibliography using the extra field in Zotero.},
language = {en},
urldate = {2021-04-29},
journal = {John M. Pfau Library Guides},
author = {Bartle, Lisa},
month = mar,
year = {2021},
keywords = {zfrancophone\_bibliogr\_annotees},
}
Zotero is a free extension for your web browser that acts as a citation management system. You can save, organize, format your citations in your paper, and more. Download csl files into Zotero, then create an annotated bibliography using the extra field in Zotero.
Review of Zotero’s New PDF Annotation Features.
Gehl, R. W.
April 2021.
Paper
link
bibtex
abstract
1 download
@misc{gehl_review_2021,
title = {Review of {Zotero}’s {New} {PDF} {Annotation} {Features}},
url = {https://fossacademic.tech/2021/04/02/ZoteroComments.html},
abstract = {Zotero recently announced two major new features: an internal PDF reader and tab-based navigation. These are scheduled to be a part of the Zotero 6 release later this year, but when I heard about them, I installed the Zotero 5 developer version to give them a whirl. My quick take on the new features? They are now a key part of the FOSS Academic Lifestyle Dream.},
language = {en},
urldate = {2021-04-12},
journal = {FOSS Academic},
author = {Gehl, Robert W.},
month = apr,
year = {2021},
keywords = {zfrancophone\_bibliogr\_annotees},
}
Zotero recently announced two major new features: an internal PDF reader and tab-based navigation. These are scheduled to be a part of the Zotero 6 release later this year, but when I heard about them, I installed the Zotero 5 developer version to give them a whirl. My quick take on the new features? They are now a key part of the FOSS Academic Lifestyle Dream.
Annotated Bibliography.
UNSW Sydney
October 2021.
Paper
link
bibtex
@misc{unsw_sydney_annotated_2021,
title = {Annotated {Bibliography}},
url = {https://student.unsw.edu.au/annotated-bibliography},
language = {en},
urldate = {2021-04-10},
journal = {University of New South Wales Sydney},
author = {{UNSW Sydney}},
month = oct,
year = {2021},
keywords = {zfrancophone\_bibliogr\_annotees},
}
How I work, Part IV: Reference Management & Reading Literature.
Erz, H.
March 2021.
Paper
link
bibtex
@misc{erz_how_2021,
title = {How {I} work, {Part} {IV}: {Reference} {Management} \& {Reading} {Literature}},
url = {https://www.hendrik-erz.de/post/how-i-work-part-iv-reference-management-reading-literature},
urldate = {2021-03-29},
journal = {Personal Research Blog},
author = {Erz, Hendrik},
month = mar,
year = {2021},
keywords = {zfrancophone\_markdown, zfrancophone\_organisation\_bib, zfrancophone\_zotfile},
}
Mise à jour de la bibliographie collaborative : plus de 300 références sur l’écriture académique.
Durier, M.
2021.
Paper
link
bibtex
abstract
@misc{durier_mise_2021,
type = {Billet},
title = {Mise à jour de la bibliographie collaborative : plus de 300 références sur l’écriture académique},
shorttitle = {Mise à jour de la bibliographie collaborative},
url = {https://ecritac.hypotheses.org/209},
abstract = {Créé il y a quelques mois, le groupe bibliographique Ecritac sur Zotero a pris de l’ampleur grâce à ses 11 membres, dont 4 actives : un grand merci à Naomi Truan, Emilie Mineo, Véronique Litaudon (et moi-même). Surtout, il référence désormais une soixantaine de manuels, une centaine d’articles de blog de chercheur.e.s, autant de publications … Continuer la lecture de Mise à jour de la bibliographie collaborative : plus de 300 références sur l’écriture académique},
language = {fr},
urldate = {2021-03-26},
journal = {Ecritac},
author = {Durier, Manon},
year = {2021},
keywords = {zfrancophone\_bibliogr\_reutilisables, zfrancophone\_organisation\_bib},
}
Créé il y a quelques mois, le groupe bibliographique Ecritac sur Zotero a pris de l’ampleur grâce à ses 11 membres, dont 4 actives : un grand merci à Naomi Truan, Emilie Mineo, Véronique Litaudon (et moi-même). Surtout, il référence désormais une soixantaine de manuels, une centaine d’articles de blog de chercheur.e.s, autant de publications … Continuer la lecture de Mise à jour de la bibliographie collaborative : plus de 300 références sur l’écriture académique
Commentary to Gusenbauer and Haddaway 2020: Evaluating retrieval qualities of Google Scholar and PubMed.
Klopfenstein, D. V.; and Dampier, W.
Research Synthesis Methods, 12(2): 126–135. March 2021.
Paper
doi
link
bibtex
abstract
@article{klopfenstein_commentary_2021,
title = {Commentary to {Gusenbauer} and {Haddaway} 2020: {Evaluating} retrieval qualities of {Google} {Scholar} and {PubMed}},
volume = {12},
copyright = {© 2020 The Authors. Research Synthesis Methods published by John Wiley \& Sons Ltd.},
issn = {1759-2887},
shorttitle = {Commentary to {Gusenbauer} and {Haddaway} 2020},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1456},
doi = {10.1002/jrsm.1456},
abstract = {We read with considerable interest the study by Gusenbauer and Haddaway (Gusenbauer and Haddaway, 2020, Research Synthesis Methods, doi:10.1002/jrsm.1378) comparing the systematic search qualities of 28 search systems, including Google Scholar (GS) and PubMed. Google Scholar and PubMed are the two most popular free academic search tools in biology and chemistry, with GS being the number one search tool in the world. Those academics using GS as their principal system for literature searches may be unaware of research which enumerates five critical features for scientific literature tools that greatly influenced Gusenbauer's 2020 study. Using this list as the framework for a targeted comparison between just GS and PubMed, we found stark differences which overwhelmingly favored PubMed. In this comment, we show that by comparing the characteristics of the two search tools, features that are particularly useful in one search tool, but are missing in the other, are strikingly spotlighted. One especially popular feature that ubiquitously appears in GS, but not in PubMed, is the forward citation search found under every citation as a clickable Cited by N link. We seek to improve the PubMed search experience using two approaches. First, we request that PubMed add Cited by N links, making them as omnipresent as the GS links. Second, we created an open-source command-line tool, pmidcite, which is used alongside PubMed to give information to researchers to help with the choice of the next paper to examine, analogous to how GS's Cited by N links help to guide users. Find pmidcite at https://github.com/dvklopfenstein/pmidcite.},
language = {en},
number = {2},
urldate = {2020-12-16},
journal = {Research Synthesis Methods},
author = {Klopfenstein, D. V. and Dampier, Will},
month = mar,
year = {2021},
pmcid = {PMC7984402},
pmid = {33031632},
keywords = {zfrancophone\_RevLit},
pages = {126--135},
}
We read with considerable interest the study by Gusenbauer and Haddaway (Gusenbauer and Haddaway, 2020, Research Synthesis Methods, doi:10.1002/jrsm.1378) comparing the systematic search qualities of 28 search systems, including Google Scholar (GS) and PubMed. Google Scholar and PubMed are the two most popular free academic search tools in biology and chemistry, with GS being the number one search tool in the world. Those academics using GS as their principal system for literature searches may be unaware of research which enumerates five critical features for scientific literature tools that greatly influenced Gusenbauer's 2020 study. Using this list as the framework for a targeted comparison between just GS and PubMed, we found stark differences which overwhelmingly favored PubMed. In this comment, we show that by comparing the characteristics of the two search tools, features that are particularly useful in one search tool, but are missing in the other, are strikingly spotlighted. One especially popular feature that ubiquitously appears in GS, but not in PubMed, is the forward citation search found under every citation as a clickable Cited by N link. We seek to improve the PubMed search experience using two approaches. First, we request that PubMed add Cited by N links, making them as omnipresent as the GS links. Second, we created an open-source command-line tool, pmidcite, which is used alongside PubMed to give information to researchers to help with the choice of the next paper to examine, analogous to how GS's Cited by N links help to guide users. Find pmidcite at https://github.com/dvklopfenstein/pmidcite.
Pulling Google Scholar Citation Counts with a Zotero Plugin for Sorting Papers.
Ribeiro, J.
November 2021.
Paper
link
bibtex
abstract
@misc{ribeiro_pulling_2021,
title = {Pulling {Google} {Scholar} {Citation} {Counts} with a {Zotero} {Plugin} for {Sorting} {Papers}},
url = {https://justinribeiro.com/chronicle/2021/11/17/pulling-google-scholar-citation-counts-with-a-zotero-plugin-for-sorting-papers/},
abstract = {While various versions of this plugin floated around, old habits die hard for this old software engineer: let's do a little retrofit rewrite.},
language = {en},
urldate = {2021-12-22},
journal = {Chronicle},
author = {Ribeiro, Justin},
month = nov,
year = {2021},
keywords = {zfrancophone\_bulletin\_veille},
}
While various versions of this plugin floated around, old habits die hard for this old software engineer: let's do a little retrofit rewrite.
Enhanced support for citations on GitHub.
Smith, A.
August 2021.
Paper
link
bibtex
abstract
@misc{smith_enhanced_2021,
title = {Enhanced support for citations on {GitHub}},
url = {https://github.blog/2021-08-19-enhanced-support-citations-github/},
abstract = {We're excited to support researchers and academics on GitHub with enhanced citation support through `CITATION.cff` files.},
language = {en-US},
urldate = {2021-12-22},
journal = {The GitHub Blog},
author = {Smith, Arfon},
month = aug,
year = {2021},
keywords = {zfrancophone\_bulletin\_veille},
}
We're excited to support researchers and academics on GitHub with enhanced citation support through `CITATION.cff` files.
Cap sur Zotero.
La Moyenâgiste
July 2021.
Paper
link
bibtex
@misc{la_moyenagiste_cap_2021,
title = {Cap sur {Zotero}},
url = {http://la.moyenagiste.fr/cap-sur-zotero},
language = {fr-FR},
urldate = {2022-02-03},
journal = {La Moyenâgiste},
author = {{La Moyenâgiste}},
month = jul,
year = {2021},
keywords = {zfrancophone\_organisation\_bib},
}
![ZoteroJSnalysis: Analyzing your Zotero library of references with Javascript [link]](http://bibbase.org/img/filetypes/link.svg "Paper")
![Migrer depuis EndNote vers Zotero [pdf]](http://bibbase.org/img/filetypes/pdf.svg "Paper")