Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27479083›Full record

ArticlePloS one2016

Analysis and Implementation of an Electronic Laboratory Notebook in a Biomedical Research Institute.

Santiago Guerrero, Gwendal Dujardin, Alejandro Cabrera-Andrade, César Paz-Y-Miño, Alberto Indacochea, Marta Inglés-Ferrándiz, Hima Priyanka Nadimpalli, Nicola Collu, Yann Dublanche, Ismael De Mingo and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
8.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Implementing an institution-wide electronic lab notebook initiative.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2022
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Santiago GuerreroGene Regulation, Stem Cells and Cancer Programme, Centre for Genomic Regulation (CRG), The Barcelona Institute for Science and Technology, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3473-7214
Gwendal DujardinGene Regulation, Stem Cells and Cancer Programme, Centre for Genomic Regulation (CRG), The Barcelona Institute for Science and Technology, Barcelona, Spain.
Alejandro Cabrera-AndradeInstituto de Investigaciones Biomédicas, Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Universidad de las Américas, Quito, Ecuador.
César Paz-Y-MiñoInstituto de Investigaciones Biomédicas, Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Universidad de las Américas, Quito, Ecuador.
Alberto IndacocheaGene Regulation, Stem Cells and Cancer Programme, Centre for Genomic Regulation (CRG), The Barcelona Institute for Science and Technology, Barcelona, Spain.
Marta Inglés-FerrándizGene Regulation, Stem Cells and Cancer Programme, Centre for Genomic Regulation (CRG), The Barcelona Institute for Science and Technology, Barcelona, Spain.
Hima Priyanka NadimpalliGene Regulation, Stem Cells and Cancer Programme, Centre for Genomic Regulation (CRG), The Barcelona Institute for Science and Technology, Barcelona, Spain.
Nicola ColluInformation and Communications Technology Department, Centre for Genomic Regulation (CRG), The Barcelona Institute for Science and Technology, Barcelona, Spain.
Yann DublancheInformation and Communications Technology Department, Centre for Genomic Regulation (CRG), The Barcelona Institute for Science and Technology, Barcelona, Spain.
Ismael De MingoInformation and Communications Technology Department, Centre for Genomic Regulation (CRG), The Barcelona Institute for Science and Technology, Barcelona, Spain.
David CamargoInformation and Communications Technology Department, Centre for Genomic Regulation (CRG), The Barcelona Institute for Science and Technology, Barcelona, Spain.
Universitat Pompeu Fabra · ESUniversidad de Las Américas · EC

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Electronic laboratory notebooks (ELNs) will probably replace paper laboratory notebooks (PLNs) in academic research due to their advantages in data recording, sharing and security. Despite several reports describing technical characteristics of ELNs and their advantages over PLNs, no study has directly tested ELN performance among researchers. In addition, the usage of tablet-based devices or wearable technology as ELN complements has never been explored in the field. To implement an ELN in our biomedical research institute, here we first present a technical comparison of six ELNs using 42 parameters. Based on this, we chose two ELNs, which were tested by 28 scientists for a 3-month period and by 80 students via hands-on practical exercises. Second, we provide two survey-based studies aimed to compare these two ELNs (PerkinElmer Elements and Microsoft OneNote) and to analyze the use of tablet-based devices. We finally explore the advantages of using wearable technology as ELNs tools. Among the ELNs tested, we found that OneNote presents almost all parameters evaluated (39/42) and both surveyed groups preferred OneNote as an ELN solution. In addition, 80% of the surveyed scientists reported that tablet-based devices improved the use of ELNs in different respects. We also describe the advantages of using OneNote application for Apple Watch as an ELN wearable complement. This work defines essential features of ELNs that could be used to improve ELN implementation and software development.

Indexed as

RecordsSoftwareAcademies and InstitutesBiomedical Research

Identifiers

PMID27479083
PMCPMC4968837
OpenAlexW2479898229

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.