RefMan features....

Given that it looks as if EndNote is the way forward for RefMan users, I’ve been looking at EN.

There are some featuresthat appear to be missing from EN:

  1. Redfman has a “term manager” function which allows merging / editing / deletion  of keynote terms
  2. It allows definition of synonyms, so Harris,A.; Harris,AJ, and Harris, AJW can de defined as synonyms and a search for Harris,A will produce the others.
  3. On searches, starting to enter a search term produces a drop-down menu, so it’s easy to get the exact term right.
  4. It;s possible to drag a reference from a RM search window into a completely different program, and the reference appears fully formatted, making it easy to send a reference in an e-mail, whereas when I try the same in EndNote, I just get the Author/Year citation.

Am I missing something?

As a user, those are all good features.

the way endnote handles number 4, is by the ctrl K (rather than ctrl C, which is used to enter the endnote citation).  Not intuitive, but it is easy to get used to. 


The whole point about the Refman feature is that I don’t have to use Ctrl-C.

if I have an e-mail programme open (I use Thunderbird, but it doesn’t matter), I can highlight the reference in a listing (usually a search result), thn hold down the left mouse button and drag down to the task bar and across onto the icon for TB and into the message window. If i then let go of the mouse button, the full formatted citation is inserted.

It’s really useful if I want to give the reference to answer a query. I also use the same technique when I’m refereeing a paper and I want to insert a reference in my comments.

I also use it to keep my CV up-to-date - open the text in a word-processor, then drag new references into it.

It’s a neat touch.

Ok - I’ve just checked - Ctrl-K does the same thing, just not quite as neat.

I guess it was a choice the developers needed to make: Do users want to drag the citation to a document (when writing) or do you want to drag and drop the whole thing (to your CV).  I prefer the way it is, because that is the most common function I use, citations. 


I moved from Refman to endnote and with few exceptions I have been very happy with it.  There is a term manager in endnote x5.  It is not quite as robust as refman 12 term manager but it does the job.  

One of the things I have found lacking in endnote is the limited search.  In refman I was able to do almost unlimited search parameters, while in endnote you are limited to 10 entries/search.  The upside is that the Smart Groups in endnote make it so you don’t need to use as many parameters.

Smart Groups are, in my opinion, the best part of endnote x5.

As I’ve been using EN more, I’ve really missed #3.

I’m also missing auto-extraction of keywords from abstracts. In general, I get the impression that key-words are less central to EN than RM, which I think is a disadvantage.

I fully agree with ajwh, particularly with the points 1), 2), 3) and the auto-extraction of keywords.

I am really disappointed by the non-existence of synonyms for the authors and keywords. I have been using RM since 1993 and devoted an incredible amount of time at properly tuning the lists so that I can search the database effectively (Researchers sometimes change names but their research remains consistent. Different keywords are sometimes used for the same problem).

And the dropdown menu made it even faster.

With EN these advantages are lost. Are you planning to update the software to include these features?

Since Thomson Reuters has chosen to not update Reference Manager (@@#%!!), I purchased Endnote. I have now converted my Reference Manager database (over 25,000 records) to an Endnote database. On the whole, there is much to like.
But, I spent days trying to find equivalent functions to Reference Manager’s author synonym solution and the autoscan of abstracts/notes for keywords. Only now (reading this topic in the community forum) have I learned that there really is none!  One would expect, since Thomson Reuters makes both programs, they would have a guide for users converting from Reference Manager to Endnote. Such a guide would make it easy to identify equivalent functions as well as those unique to either program. This would save former Reference Manager users a great deal of aggravation!

Thomson Reuters: Is that to much to ask for??