New to Synapse: Additional Publication Formats

A frequent question we are asked by our users is how to retrieve only research (or peer-reviewed) articles from Synapse. Previously our “Journal Articles” category included other formats such as editorials, commentaries, letters, reviews, guidelines, interviews etc. Identifying just research articles was difficult without looking through the Synapse records one by one – but no longer!  Beginning with 2020 publications and moving forward, we have refined this category to separate the various formats, allowing our users to more precisely retrieve their desired publication data. We will continue to also filter meeting abstracts, conference papers, book chapters, and whole books.

Here are our new categories (see full list):

Correspondence: letters to the editor, replies, and other items included in the correspondence sections of journals.

Editorial: editorials, viewpoints, commentaries, and other opinion type pieces published in journals. Also includes sections of a journal typically authored by the editorial board, such as the preface or introduction to a special issue.  

Guidelines: a set of guidelines/recommendations written on behalf of a professional group or society. May also be called a consensus statement. Examples include guidelines and related updates provided by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network.

Journal Article: presentation of original research investigations that are likely, but not always, peer-reviewed. This category includes studies such as: clinical trials, case reports, brief reports, meta-analyses, laboratory investigations, retrospective analyses, CME activities, and white papers. 

Miscellaneous: items that do not fall within other categories such as: book reviews, interviews, obituaries, debates, podcasts etc.  These works are usually not peer-reviewed.

Research Letter: original research presented in journals as correspondence.   

Review: comprehensive literature, topic, or subject summaries, including systematic reviews.   

If you have any questions, please don’t hesitate to contact us.

Happy New Year!

Finding Clinical Trials

Searching efficiently for clinical trials is often challenging for researchers. The majority of clinical trials are not published in peer-review publications. Therefore, the results are never reported and disseminated (1). Additionally, there are multiple clinical trial registries with considerable overlap (2).

While the aim of the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), launched in 2007 by the World Health Organisation (WHO) (3), is to act as a single platform to search for clinical trials, it has been reported by Glanville and Knelangen that “even though ClinicalTrials.gov is included in the WHO ICTRP Search Portal, not all ClinicalTrials.gov records can be successfully retrieved via searches of the ICTRP Search Portal”(4). To be comprehensive when searching for clinical trials, we will need to search across multiple registers.

Here are some steps that may be helpful when searching for clinical trials:

Finding clinical trials from registries:

Finding clinical trials with published results:

  • PubMed clinical queries
    A broad therapy search will retrieve clinical trials, if you are interested in Randomized Clinical trials only, you can change the scope from broad to specific/narrow.

  • The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL)
    The records are pulled mainly from the databases PubMed and Embase.

  • ClinicalTrials.gov
    In the advanced search, you can select “Studies with Results” to retrieve only studies where the results have been reported:

Finding clinical trials for COVID-19:

For information on clinical trials at MSKCC, please visit the following page: https://www.mskcc.org/cancer-care/clinical-trials

References

  1. DeVito NJ, Bacon S and Goldacre B. Compliance with legal requirement to report clinical trial results on ClinicalTrials.gov: a cohort study. The Lancet 2020; 395: 361-369. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)33220-9.
  2. van Valkenhoef G, Loane RF and Zarin DA. Previously unidentified duplicate registrations of clinical trials: an exploratory analysis of registry data worldwide. Systematic Reviews 2016; 5: 116. DOI: 10.1186/s13643-016-0283-8.
  3. Karam G and Ross AL. The WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform: Providing global clinical trial information to all. On Medicine. 2020.
  4. Lefebvre C GJ, Briscoe S, Littlewood A, Marshall C, Metzendorf M-I, Noel-Storr A, Rader T, Shokraneh F, Thomas J, Wieland LS. . Chapter 4: Searching for and selecting studies. In: Higgins JPT TJ, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Welch VA (ed) Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 61 (updated September 2020). Cochrane, 2020.
  •  

Coming Soon: EndNote 20’s New Interface

Clarivate Analytics released the latest version of the EndNote citation management software in Fall 2020. The DigITs Technology Division plans to update MSK accounts to EndNote 20 in the early months of 2021. Please keep an eye on the MSK Library’s homepage for an upcoming notification message regarding the expected date for the MSK EndNote 20 scheduled update.

Here’s “What’s new in EndNote 20” according to the vendor (see 2:01 min video):

    • New modern interface design
    • Duplicate detection enhancements
    • Improved PDF reading experience
    • Time-saving workflow improvements

If you were a heavy user of the extensive toolbars of buttons/icons used in previous Endnote versions, you may miss them in this more minimalist, pared-down interface layout which was intentionally designed to be sleeker and more “modern”. Beyond aesthetics, however, the latest version has not changed very much in terms of functionality. As this comparison table between previous versions demonstrates, no functionality has actually been taken away.

New features in terms of functionality

Particularly for those who use EndNote to manage citations for systematic review projects, the enhanced duplicate detection functionality will be a welcome addition, with DOIs and PMCIDs now available as optional comparison fields. Also, for those who have a need to work between multiple libraries simultaneously, the ability to have more than one library open within the same window in EndNote 20 will make switching back and forth between multiple libraries easier. There is also more flexibility in how PDFs stored within EndNote can be viewed and handled.

Another notable change with EndNote 20 is that all of the 7,000+ bibliographic output styles available for EndNote will now come pre-loaded in the EndNote 20 desktop version, minimizing the possibility that authors will not find their needed output style and have to go download it from the vendor’s website. Additional tweaks to the number caps for various functions have been made to the latest updates of EndNote 20 and EndNote Online (for desktop users). All of these details can be found in these latest version comparison charts: HTML version and PDF version.

If you have any questions or concerns about the upcoming EndNote 20 update, please feel free to Ask Us at the MSK Library!