Mapping a field from procite to PMCID Field

I’m trying to convert my procite DB to EndNote to test to see if everything converts correctly so we can upgrade to endnote.  I have a field in procite that I use for my PMCIDs.  I was happy to see that endnote has this field but when I go to field mapping when I’m trying to customize my conversion there is no PMCID field in the drop down list under abstract.  I don’t want this field going to the notes field.  It will be so much more work to put it in the PMCID field later.

Thank you so much

Because it was an additional field, added later, the developers mapped it to the Custom 2 field in the Journal reference type.  As the mapping dropdown could apply to other reference types as well, you need to use this name and map to the Custom 2 field. 


Thank you so much for the quick reply.  This is a big project and I need to investigate how this conversion will fully work and how much time it will take to do.  

What about fields like Author Role which I now is gone but there are 3 fields in procite that have this info?

I still haven’t mapped these procite fields yet can you shed any light on how I should map them:

Medium Designator


Place of Meeting


Author, Subsidiary

Report Id

Extent of Work

Packaging Method


Reproduction Ration

Series Editor Role

Serives Volume ID

Series Issue ID

Document Type


I have an export process in procite that generates a file that I upload using a different process.  I’m trying to map all the fields then try and repllicate that export text file so I can just run it through my other process.  

Thanks again

Wow, you do have a job. 

I would approach this by first deciding which of the Endnote reference types most closely match your records.  You can look at the mapping available in the EndNoteHelp.pdf that is located on in the EndnoteX5 folder in Program Files (x86) (at least that is where it is on my win7 machine). There is a list of the Table of Predefined Reference Types and their mapping to the generic names. 

Once I know which ref types I am using, I hide the rest by putting a dot in front of their names in via editing the ref types in preferences.  You can also add additional fields there.  Then if other users machines need the revised ref types, you need to export the ref type table (from the edit preferences, ref type) and import it into the other machines (via the same place in their endnote program). 

NOTE: Anyone who customizes ref type/tables, should do export a backup before upgrading, as (with the PMCID field) developers have usurped some of the custom fields, and when you upgrade, this can mess up users who have used the same field from something else. 


Thanks again for your help.  I’m sorry but I didn’t understand your explanation fully.  From procite there are 45 fields accross different types.  The only ones that I’m using in procite are Book Chapter, Book Whole, Conference Proceedings,Dissertation, Journal Long Form and Report.   Do I have to define the mapping for each one of these types?

Currently when I export with Procite it puts every field for every row delimited by a comma and a ^ wraping the value.  I was hoping to do the same thing with EndNote.  Is it possible for me to map the 45 fields and then have them exported in the same structure as I have in procite?

A problem i’m seeing is that “Title, Monographic” and “Journal Title” both go to the same EndNote field “Secondary Title”.  Is this a case where these two fields in procite should never be populated at the same time so there should be no conflict?

Thank you for the help.  I know once I figure all of this out that EndNote should be much easier to use it’s just getting to that point.


to be honest, this isn’t my strong suit.  I suspect that you might engage tech support to help with this conversion.  If you exported each reference type separately, it might be more intuitive as to the mapping options?  Then if you felt that the monographic title belonged somewhere else in a different ref type, you could adjust the mapping in that import.  You could also edit the group if it went in with the wrong ref type using endnotes change/move fields or edit text tools. 

How does a Journal long form as opposed to (I presume) Report?  I don’t really need to know!, just curious. 


Can I email tech support this question?  How long does it take? I have till the end of day today to come up with a way to get procite into EndNote correctly.  We are meeting on Monday to discuss if this is possible or if it is work moving to EndNote.

I didn’t fully understand your question and you explain it?

Thank you

I would call if I were you with this time constraint. 

Call (them) at 800-336-4474 and at the prompt press 4, and then select the “ResearchSoft Products” option. Alternatively, Email Technical Support for Thomson Reuters EndNote or for EndNote Web.


thank you for the information.  One other quick question.  Why do the custom fields mean something different for each reference type?  I have a field in procite that is called Author Role which in EndNote does not exist.  This field exists in Jouranl Long Form and in Book Chapter.  I want both reference to use Custom5 for this field but in Book Chapter Custom 5 is already set for a different field.

This is getting confusing.

Thanks for the help

I don’t have any idea,  but I suspect no one will miss “packaging method” (also used as “format” in the film and related ref types)?  Also, Electronic ref types almost use up all the custom options, I see! 

Another legacy loomingl problem. 

Oh, that is one of the ones you use! 


Thanks again but I still don’t get why are different?  Shouldn’t Custom 5 be the same thing in all the reference types since it’s a custom field?  I just want fields that are coming from the same location to be mapped to the same location in EndNote.

How come when I’m doing an output style I can’t see the custome fields in the list of fields I want to add?


I don’t know!  I am just a user, not a designer and I don’t work for Thomson!   

When you are in the output style and in a bibliography template for a specific reference type that has mapped names (as edited in the edit>preferences, reference types, modify)  they appear in the drop down so you can insert them, by their mapped name, into that template.  If you are in the “generic” template,  everything is fair game up to and including custom 8.  If you are in a place that applies to all templates (like the citation) the drop down has to be generic, because, as you noted, different things can be mapped to the same generic field. since there isn’t an inexhaustible number of fields - as new things come up that people feel need to be tracked, they use them up.  – is there any field that you feel is superfluous to the needs for your specific reference types, and you can repurpose???