Hello Doug,
Thank you so very much for all the information. It seems the first step is to ensure the core is mentioned in the publications, which is something we need to improve on. So thank you the tips on that front too.
If the number of publications becomes a KPI for our core facilities, we'll indeed need to revise our options to track them.
Thanks again!
------------------------------
Sarah McAtamney
Griffith University
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 02-05-2025 13:48
From: Douglas Cromey
Subject: iLab Publication Tracker module - thoughts?
My colleague, Noah Curtis, was able to dig up from his email archives some of my observations (2019) regarding the iLab publication tracker. Things may have improved with the iLab publication tracker module, but our experience with Agilent is that they can often be slow in making changes. We tested the iLab publication tracker (again, in 2019) and ultimately decided not to purchase it.
2019 observations
Some preliminary observations (made to our Director) regarding EndNote vs the iLab Publication tracker. I do not claim to be an expert user of EndNote.
| ISSUE | EndNote 9 | iLab Publication tracker |
| Databases searched | Several hundred possible | PubMed only |
| Queries saved | Yes | Yes |
| Sharing | Has a cloud-based method of sharing publications with multiple users (100) | Queries are specific to a single core. One core can see if other cores have claimed the publication, but that's about it. |
| Granularity | · With the ability to customize term lists (see Annotation comments below) we can have as many levels of granularity in categorizing publications as is needed · Publications could be associated with specific instruments (useful for S10 annual reports), core services, and core names · Other items could be flagged, such as P30 centers | · Publications can be marked with three levels (Contributorship, Acknowledgement, Other) if a core member is not an author. · Authorship can be noted. · Publications are associated with cores (not specific instruments or services) |
| Annotation | · Simple customization (customizing an unused DB field) appears to allow us to tag items with terms that we can define. · The term list would need to be standardized to ensure its usefulness for future queries. · If needed, there are several unused DB fields that could be put to work, but there appears to be an upper limit of four available fields. | NONE |
| Time savings | · If another core is reviewing publications and sees that a microscope was used, perhaps they can flag that in some way so that I (and others) can find the publication quicker and make the decision as to whether the authors used a UA core. We could do the same for them (ALEC, UAC, Flow Cytometry, etc.). · If I needed to do an S10 annual report and the publications were already tagged in EndNote with the instrument in question, finding them is a simple query using the custom field & term. | · Because of permissions in iLab, if I read a paper that may have used another campus core – there is no way to flag it for the staff of that core. The members of the other core now have to find it themselves. This potentially leads to multiple people looking at the same publication when maybe one person could save another person's time. · Since iLab does not allow annotations, if I need to create an annual report on my S10 funded instrument, I have to review all the recent publications in iLab a second time to select out those that I need to include in the report. |
| Automation | "Smart groups" can be created that look at the entire DB of publications and sort out sub-sets based on specific queries. | Queries are run manually. |
I have some ideas for the list of terms, but this may be something that needs more expertise and input than one person brings to the table. To me, the possibility of all of us looking out for each other as a first level screen means that somewhere down the line there is a time-saving aspect to using EndNote, and when you consider that the people doing the screening are likely to be the better-paid employees in each core, that seems valuable. Unfortunately, PubMed does not capture the physical sciences very well.
Addition 2019 observations
The data we are being asked to collect for internal Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), is similar to what I have needed to collect for P30 annual reports & renewals for the last 25 years, I know it's a pain (especially the publications). Here's some suggestions:
Core manager behavioral changes (that I have done)
- Better communicating to my users that we need to know about their publications (asking them to send us a link or PDF) and why we need that information, this includes:
- Building a webpage with information that makes it easier to cite the core (we have since gotten an RRID for our core and made that well known)
- Incorporate signage next to instruments (points to the webpage)
- Send monthly email reminders to users via iLab (references webpage)
- Incorporate an additional PowerPoint slide about citing the core in training presentations (mentions webpage)
- I am aware that other cores around the country actually have people sign something that says the user will cite the core in publications, but I'm not ready to go that route.
Possibilities with Endnote for tracking publications
- Endnote is desktop (Windows or MacOS) reference management software with the ability to share your DB data via the cloud.
- Capable of importing data located using online search tools such as PubMed, Web of Science, and many others. The limitation of iLab is that it only searches PubMed, which is not useful for engineering/materials/physical sciences type cores.
- Because Endnote is a database with some ability for customization, we can come up with common ways to flag publications, not only for ourselves but possibly for our colleagues. In other words, if I see something (when scanning the methods or acknowledgements section of a publication) that I think may have used the flow cytometry core I can flag that and help that core catch a publication or two. This can be shared via the cloud.
- The customizability of Endnote also allows core managers who want to track which instruments or specific services were used in a publication to tag things that way. Personally, since one of my instruments was funded by an NIH S10 shared instrumentation grant, being able to create a query in Endnote that just shows the publications for that instrument will make my annual reports for the S10 grant easier.
- If you have to do annual reports or renewals for center (P30) grants, you could also tag things for people who are members of a specific center.
- Our Library offers free monthly Endnote classes and the possibility of one-on-one help with using Endnote and/or search strategies. I have found them very helpful!
Final 2025 comments
- Even using EndNote required more maintenance/bandwidth than I had available and (in 2025) I no longer use it. Even with an academic license, it's moderately expensive software on a per-seat basis.
- Our institution now, more or less, requires the use of an ORCID, which is super helpful for finding the work of faculty members with non-unique names.
- Our institution has established its own publication and dissertation repository. This has become my absolute favorite first tool to search for publications that may have cited the core or at least used one our microscopes. Being able to cite honors, masters, and PhD theses/dissertations looks really good on internal reports! My only complaint is the occasionally embargoed dissertation due to intellectual property reasons. After that I lean on Google Scholar, I feel like the search engine is a bit more robust for finding text that references specific instrument names (or my relatively unique last name) buried in the body of the publication.
Doug Cromey
Imaging Cores – Optical
University of Arizona
Original Message:
Sent: 2/5/2025 12:31:00 PM
From: Robert Searles
Subject: RE: iLab Publication Tracker module - thoughts?
I use the iLab Publication Tracker. I feel that it's no worse than any other option we have. It's hard to impossible to streamline if you're looking for large numbers of publications per month, but that's not unique to this product. I've managed to make it a bit more manageable by using appropriate filters on the search results. Even with the filters, I still spend a fair amount of time manually curating the results. I don't see this changing until research institutions require the acknowledging of cores in all manuscripts and publishers start requiring something like an RRID for each service center that contributed to the work.
Bob Searles
Integrated Genomics Laboratory
Oregon Health and Science University
------------------------------
Robert Searles
Director
Oregon Health & Science University
Original Message:
Sent: 02-03-2025 23:56
From: Sarah McAtamney
Subject: iLab Publication Tracker module - thoughts?
Hello iLab community
We are interested in the Publication Tracker module Agilent can provide for iLab.
Does your institution use it? Please let us know if your core facilities find it useful and if it can be used in a streamlined fashion (we don't want to add an admin burden to our iLab core managers).
For more information on this module, please see Agilent's guide: Publication Tracker
Thank you!
------------------------------
Sarah McAtamney
Griffith University
------------------------------