Style error: JCI Insight

operating system: Windows 10
Zotero version: 6.0.27

The citations of online journals appear with a link in the reference list and the format is not quite correct. "Include URLS of paper articles in references" is already unchecked.

This is how it looks in my citations:
2. Acevedo GR, Girard MC, Gómez KA. The Unsolved Jigsaw Puzzle of the Immune Response in Chagas Disease. Frontiers in Immunology. 2018;9.https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2018.01929. . Accessed June 9, 2023

This is how it looks a citation from Frontiers in Immunology in a paper that has been published in JCI Insight:
63. Snyder LM, et al. Retinoic acid mediated clearance of Citrobacter rodentium in vitamin A deficient mice requires CD11b+ and T cells. Front Immunol. 2018;9:3090.
  • edited September 13, 2023
    Hi,

    We've actually updated the JCI style very recently and to me the style looks in accordance with the guidelines.

    This is how citations look for me with the JCI style (JCI Insights is just a dependent style). So, this is an issue on your end, for for everybody due to an incorrect style.

    1. Mares I. Firms and the welfare state: When, why, and how does social policy matter to employers? In: Hall PA, Soskice D, eds. Varieties of capitalism. The institutional foundations of comparative advantage. New York: Oxford University Press; 2001:184–213
    2. Campbell JL, Pedersen OK. The varieties of capitalism and hybrid success. Comp Polit Stud. 2007;40(3):307–332.

    You see that there are no URLs. Please switch to a different style and back to JCI. If that doesn't help, try in a fresh document. Make sure you have nothing superfluous in the extra field.

    https://www.zotero.org/styles?q=id:the-journal-of-clinical-investigation
  • @damnation -- this hits for journals with no page number and no DOI. I think that's about right, but the wrong punctuation for articles that really do only have a URL is in the access macro (there's both a suffix=". " and a delimiter=". " that overlap).

    @cintia_a29 in the case of the Frontiers paper, there should be both the DOI (10.3389/fimmu.2018.01929 ) in the DOI field and the article number (1929) in the page number field. That appears broken on import currently -- we'll try to fix asap.
  • Thank you.
    Do you mean to test the last link? It appears as a lot of codes that I don't know what to do about it.
  • I've changed for JCI style and the same happens. The problem is only with citations from Frontiers.

    1. Pérez-Molina JA, Molina I. Chagas disease. The Lancet. 2018;391(10115):82–94.

    2. Acevedo GR, Girard MC, Gómez KA. The Unsolved Jigsaw Puzzle of the Immune Response in Chagas Disease. Frontiers in Immunology. 2018;9.https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2018.01929. . Accessed June 9, 2023
  • See my post above though -- this will automatically be fixed even with the current style if you add a page/article number and DOI
  • The DOI and the article number were already loaded.
    I've changed the style and then back to JCI but the citations remain as above.
  • No, you absolutely don't get the above citation with a DOI or page number. You either have the item in Word disconnected from your Zotero library or you're updating a duplicate item.
  • Thank you, there was some problem in the link between Word and Zotero, I had to re-add the citations.

    Now it appears like this:
    2. Acevedo GR, Girard MC, Gómez KA. The Unsolved Jigsaw Puzzle of the Immune Response in Chagas Disease. Frontiers in Immunology. 2018;9(1929). https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2018.01929

    Still don't know why the URL appears (even though I deleted that information)
  • You put 1929 into the issue, not the page field . If there's no page number, we provide the DOI (what you see now), which is in line with the guidance, e.g. for in press items.
  • Like this is correct? (even though the journal has no page numbers?)

    2. Acevedo GR, Girard MC, Gómez KA. The Unsolved Jigsaw Puzzle of the Immune Response in Chagas Disease. Frontiers in Immunology. 2018;9(1929):1929.
  • SOLVED.
    Thank you a lot!!!
  • Yes, exactly -- see the Snyder et al. example in your first post; same thing.
Sign In or Register to comment.