Please reduce the space between the title and abstract

endnoter · July 31, 2013, 8:42am

Hi,

I find that the space between the title and the abstract is unnecessary large, when we click to get more detail on a given reference!

It would be much better if this space is smaller to keep an idea to the title and the abstract at the same time! Currently, there are a lot of "unused empty fields (eg. type of article, Original publication, reprint edition, legale note, PMCID, NIHMSID, Article number, Accession numeber, call number, Label, Keywords…etc. that separate the title from the article abstract! So, we can’t keep an eye at them !

So, if there is at least un option to hide unfilled or unused fields in the reference, it would be great! This will save space and gets compact version for the essential of the information.

Why not to organize the information differently while keeping the possibility to format to any journal style?

For example, I would display first:

The journal name and all related information (vol, issue, page n°…etc) before the article title, and then comes the abstract immediatly the abstracy! This will keep the title and the abstract as close as possible each to other and thus avoid a long unnecessary interumption between them!

Of course, this should not interfer with the possibility to format to the specific journal style! The order here should be displayed independently of the journal style! It is just for space and compacting information and for more readability…

The journal style formatting should be possible wherever the citation information are placed in the reference details.

In summary, I would propose to organize reference details as follow in the order:

Journal information (name, vol, issue, page…etc)
Artile Title
Abstract
other information…

Or better:

- Article’s title

- authors

- Abstract,

- ** the other Journal information (name, vol, issue, page…etc)**

- other information…

As such, we can keep an eye at the essential information (title, author and abstract in the same displayed spaced, withour need to scrolling up or down!

The title and abstract are much important than the journal infor about vol, issue, page numbers…etc, so we should be able to have the essential information in one look!

Thank you

leanne · July 31, 2013, 6:56pm

@endnoter wrote:

So, if there is at least un option to hide unfilled or unused fields in the reference, it would be great! This will save space and gets compact version for the essential of the information.

There is a Hide unfilled option, in the “gears” -upper right hand corner. If “Show Empty fields” is deselected, they are hidden…

endnoter · July 31, 2013, 6:59pm

Edited, to make it clearer:

When we click one a reference in Endnote library to read the full title and the abstract (in the right side as this is more practical than to open full new window for the given reference), we find the long following information separating the Title from its corresponding Abstract:

Rating

Author

Year

Title

Journal

Vol

Issue

Page

Start Page

Epub

Date

Type of Article

Short title

Alternate Journal

ISSN

DOI

Original Publication

Reprint Edition

Reviewed item

Legal note

PMCID

RNHMSID

Article number

Accession number

Call number

Label

Keywords

ABSTRACT

etc.

I find this long separation between the title and the abstract is not necessary. It delays so long the abstract, so we have to scroll down to find the abstract!

The information shoul in my mind better organized by putting the absract not so far way under the title. This is the most logical way to see the title and the abstract in the same space of displaying, as they are the most important part in the citation that we need to read.

Moreover, many of the above fields are often empty and not displayed in the citation, so why let them separate the most important piece of the article?

So, I would propose the following order (or any other order that keeps title and abstract close each to other and visible in the top of the reference details panel) :

Rating

Author

Year

Title

ABSTRACT

Journal

Vol

Issue

Page

Start Page

Epub

Date

Type of Article

Short title

Alternate Journal

ISSN

DOI

Original Publication

Reprint Edition

Reviewed item

Legal note

PMCID

RNHMSID

Article number

Accession number

Call number

Label

Keywords

etc…

…

Good suggestion, no?

leanne · July 31, 2013, 7:04pm

Doesn’t bother me. I use the preview tab with my favorite output, a version of annotated, I created.

endnoter · July 31, 2013, 7:07pm

Sorry, Leanne I posted my previous comment at the same time as you!

I do not see this option you talk about but I’ve already found that clicking on “Preview” keeps only the necessary information I am talking about!

This is what I am asking for!

Sorry, I had to explore all the available options!

endnoter · July 31, 2013, 7:09pm

Again, I was composing my comment when you posted your answer!

Yes indeed, the ‘Preview’ option is the good one!

Thank you.

leanne · July 31, 2013, 7:38pm

endnoter · July 31, 2013, 8:20pm

I think the suggestion is still valid, though! :smiley_cat:

It would improve the reference display and make it more “logical” and concordat with the “Preview” display (title, abstrract and so on…).

leanne · July 31, 2013, 9:43pm

yes, it just requires they rewrite the software…

leanne · July 31, 2013, 9:44pm

I suspect you need to become a beta tester for them?

leanne · July 31, 2013, 9:46pm

@endnoter wrote:

Sorry, Leanne I posted my previous comment at the same time as you!

I do not see this option you talk about but I’ve already found that clicking on “Preview” keeps only the necessary information I am talking about!

This is what I am asking for!

Sorry, I had to explore all the available options!

Did you find the hide empty fields option yet?

endnoter · August 2, 2013, 3:05am

No, thanks (for the beta tester!), although I could have some of interesting suggestions! :smiley:

For example, I don’t understand why there are three modes of library view (local, online and mix)?

I am thinking to abandon Endnote for ever!

Even this wont please to Thomson Reuter community, but I will say it though!

I do not like some of Thomson Reuters practices; it has transformed Science from its “noble” vocation to a pure business line with its stupid Impact factor concept!

If there is any “impact”, it should be for the scientist not for the journal! As journal is nothing except a support!

Classification in Science is not suitable…

Some, if not all, of the so-called “high impact factor” journals see themselves as infallible institutions with their “high” IF !

Scientific publishing has alas transformed to a buisiness affair after the introduction of the “damned” impact factor and the rating of universities!

There are many open acces bibliography alternatives!

Thomson Reuters has to do something similar to Nobel Prize to forgive its huge error to corrupt Science in inventing the stupid IF, in the sam way Nobel has done with his Prize to forgive his error in inventing a stupid nocive material!

Thomson has to do the same or retract its stupid IF from corrupting science and transform it to dirty field!

To answer your other question;

Did you find the hide empty fields option yet?

Yes I found it, thanks.

But even hide empty is checked, there is still a huge space between the title and the abstract; we cannont keep an eye to both in the same view. We have to scroll down to see the abstract, and then we lose the title!

endnoter · August 12, 2013, 1:05pm

If there is any “impact”, it should be for the scientist not for the journal! As journal is nothing except a support!

Classification in Science is not suitable…

Evenu for authors, this is not appropriate in Science. Science should not have rating or classification system as informations and findings may change very often. Also, introducing author-based ratingf system this will create more conflicts and arrogance among authors and institutions.

So, any classification or rating systems in Science should be striclty banned.

nboxall · October 13, 2015, 9:42am

I think the OP an I have the same issue.

The workaround of using ‘preview’ view doesn’t allow you to edit any of the fields.

I use a custom field to indicate whether to keep/discard a reference based on it’s title and abstract, but have to scroll (no use of down arrows, or page down buttons) between the top and bottom of the reference in the reference pain to even view the abstract at the same time as the title.

I get that EndNote has a ‘default’ order - but surely we should be able to turn some of those fields off, or reorder them for the users preference? Thus far, I can’t find a way to do so.