Reporting Mendeley Style Error: Scandinavian Journal of Public Health

m.hvidberg
Hi

I would much appreciate if someone could have a look at the Mendeley citation style Scandinavian Journal of Public Health dated 29-03-2013, which contains several errors. I have tried to edit and correct it myself without luck, and I could not find any working styles. It is close to the SAGE Vancouver style (also existing), but do differ some from the requirements of Scandinavian Journal of Public Health.

I have tried listing the errors in details as requested with suggested corrections (not showed here, byt can be emailed separately for formatting and more details and examples of Bibliography not showed below).

Here is the requested information:
SJPH: eISSN: 16511905 ISSN: 14034948
A link to online style documentation:
*SJPH: https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/journal/scandinavian-journal-public-health#JournalLayout AND: http://studysites.uk.sagepub.com/repository/binaries/pdf/SAGE_Vancouver_reference_style.pdf

The following two citations - for a journal article and a book chapter - correctly formatted as requested::
• Campbell, JL, and Pedersen, OK, The varieties of capitalism and hybrid success. Comp Pol Studies 2007; 40(3): p.307–332.
• Mares, I. Firms and the welfare state: When, why, and how does social policy matter to employers? In P. A. Hall & D. Soskice (eds) Varieties of capitalism. The institutional foundations of comparative advantage. New York: Oxford University Press, 2001, pp. 184–213

Thanks for help, it is much appreciated. Merry Christmas too.

Best regards
Michael


Errors in Mendeley citation style “Scandinavian Journal of Public Health”:

1. References in text: are listed as 6,10 and not in “square brackets” for example [6], see requirements*.
2. References in text: There is no space between references in text: [6,10] should be [6, 10].
3. Bibliography: The reference numbers in the bibliography should also be in “square brackets” and without punctuation, see requirements* or examples below**.
4. Bibliography: should also have abbreviated journal names. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health should be Scand J of Public Health. See examples below**.
5. Bibliography: Year is placed last as (2011) and not correctly after journal name without any brackets. See examples below**.
6. Bibliography www: www links shows up for journal articles, and not only internet material and/or reports as they only should. For example this link appears incorrrectly for a jurnal article http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17786807 if the link is kept in Mendeley. Other styles do not do that. See below **.
7. Bibliography DOI link: DOI link also shows up for journal articles, for example http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rmed.2011.01.012 - as should they not.
8. Bibliography www: The www “accessed X X X” is wrong and should be showed last as for example (accessed 27 August 2014) and for only internet material and/or reports with links. Not for example (2011, accessed 21 August 2015).
9. Bibliography www: also shows page numbers which it should not.
10. Bibliography report/webpage: Report should include “institution:” affiliations from Mendeley, NOT “city:” that includes adresses from Mendeley. See below differences regarding report *** and webpages****.

(The ** , *** and **** "below examples" are discarded but can be emailed or posted later if needed)
  • noksagt
    So this is a dependent style of the Sage Vancouver style, https://www.zotero.org/styles/sage-vancouver?source=1

    Reading Sage's author instructions, we may need to have TWO different Vancouver styles (for STM and for HSS journals, as text citations are either superscripted or are bracketed). This would address issues 1 and 3.

    Issue 4 you raised may be peculiar to Mendeley or the way you are using it. The style already specifies that journal abbreviations (container title form="short") be used.

    I can confirm that 5-8 are issues that need to be fixed. For 6-7, there should be a check for the existence of page numbers, as DOI is used for articles ahead of print.

    I don't know what you mean by 9.
  • adamsmith
    I'm posting some adjustments to the style that will likely fix this for you either way, but 5-7 are actually correct in the style. You just need to set Mendeley to only show URLs in citation styles (I believe that's under View-->Citation Styles --> More Styles, but you'd have to ask Mendeley support if that doesn't help. I know it's possible). This is required for a large number of styles to work correctly as this is generally the setting CSL styles assume.

    As for 8, I see no indication that the publication date shouldn't be included with the accessed date as per the Sage Vancouver instructions, which the journal directly links to.

    10. CSL uses the publisher-place field for reports, which I think is in line with the example in the style guide (Oxford:OUP). I'm not sure you should have extensive address info in the "City" field in Mendeley (I doubt it), but again, this would be something to take up with Mendeley support.

    As you see, most or your issues are actually Mendeley specific. For that reason, we encourage Mendeley users to report style errors directly via http://support.mendeley.com/customer/portal/articles/1392513

    Those reports are shared both with Mendeley's customer report and us at CSL, so the right folks can answer where needed.

    Update for brackets is on its way, I'll post here when it's up.
  • m.hvidberg
    First of all thanks to you all answering and working on it. I will contact Mendeley too.

    Sorry about bullet 6-7 – I was not aware of the function in Mendeley being able to show www addresses for specific citation styles (actually only all or webpages). Likewise for bullet 4.

    However, regarding bullet 5, this seems to be a difference between the Scandinavian Journal of Public Health style AND the SAGE Vancouver style. I have tried to email some examples to show including this issue – I hope Adam Smith has received it. It might be a good idea to do both Scandinavian Journal of Public Health (SJPH) style and the two SAGE Vancouver styles (STM and HSS) proposed by noksagt.

    Bullet 8. I might not have explained it properly. It is just that the “year” is placed differently in the SJPH style and thus not yet correctly. See examples below****. This is also different to the SAGE Vancouver style notably.

    Bullet 9. If you have noted pages numbers in Mendeley, this will also show on webpages as it should not. See **** “…Institute]. 1–3, “ reference example 11.

    Thanks again. Best regards Michael


    **** ”Webpages”
    WRONG:
    11. Statens Serum Institute. Monitorering af kronisk sygdom hos Statens Serum Institut [Monitoring of chronic disease at Statens Serum Institute]. 1–3, www.ssi.dk/Sundhedsdataogit/Sundhedsvaesenet i tal/Monitoreringer/Kronisk sygdom/Monitorering - Kronisk sygdom 2011.aspx (2012, accessed 10 November 2014).

    CORRECT of SJPH (and different from the SAGE Vancouver guidelines too regarding placement of year):

    [12] Zeuthen HE, Emerek R, Hansen PV, et al. Integreret Database for Arbejdsmarkedsforskning
    [The Integrated Database for Longitudinal Labour Market Research]. Statistics Denmark 1990, http://www.dst.dk/upload/hovedrapport.pdf (accessed 30 November 2009).

    Or

    [13] Statens Institut for Folkesundhed [National Institute of Public Health]. Sygdomsbyrden i danmark [Burden of disease in Denmark ]. Report for Sundhedsstyrelsen [National Board of Health], September 2015, Denmark, https://sundhedsstyrelsen.dk/da/nyheder/2015/~/media/00C6825B11BD46F9B064536C6E7DFBA0.ashx (accessed 12 November 2015).
  • adamsmith
    right, I had seen those, but I guess my question is: where are you getting the information about wrong and right webpage citations? SJPH links to the Sage Vancouver style and that's the only reference style information I can find. If they're not actually following that in any other way than the square brackets, they'd need to specify that.
    Unless this comes straight from the editors, I'm not comfortable to assume that some example citations from articles are necessarily in their preferred format (especially since copyeditors would likely not care much either way).

    As for 9 -- don't include page numbers for webpages in Mendeley. That doesn't make sense and it'll break citation styles all over the place.
  • DWL-SDCA
    edited December 13, 2015
    (especially since copyeditors would likely not care much either way)
    Also, it is important to remember that what appears in the printed or final pdf version of an item is not necessarily the punctuation and formatting that is required for manuscript submission. The copyediting and typesetting processes of various publishers may demand that the electronic manuscript be more simple than that of the final printed product.

    Also, a manuscript with minor differences from the style guide -- especially when the guide is vague -- will likely be rapidly returned for revision not rejected outright. Depending upon the publisher this can occur before circulation to reviewers or after the review but before acceptance.

    If a journal has opaque or incomplete author guidelines, your manuscript will be in good company with all of the other ones that their authors' intuition failed to see inside the mind of the publisher. The staff who receive submissions will have experience in dealing with such manuscripts.

    Aside-- I am not intending to suggest that when author instructions are clear one may be careless about the format of their manuscript.
  • adamsmith
    Also, a manuscript with minor differences from the style guide -- especially when the guide is vague -- will likely be rapidly returned for revision not rejected outright.
    right, though there's nothing vague about the instructions in this case. I have no problem following published articles when instructions are vague. In this case they're completely clear, but m.hvidberg says they're incorrect--which is certainly possible--and I'm asking for more details on that.

    (and obviously we'll want the style to be 100% correct.)
  • adamsmith
    I do have an updated version with square brackets and DOI up now, btw. We can still take SJPH independent, but I'd like to avoid this: the whole point of having standards is to not have thousands of small variants.
  • m.hvidberg
    Hi Again. And thanks. I am still waiting for a final reply from the SJPH, but due to the Holidays they will first reply sometime in january.
    By the way, how can I obtain the SAGE Vancouver updated version with square brackets and DOI? best regards.
  • adamsmith
    Sorry, I hadn't actually pushed that out. It's now at https://github.com/citation-style-language/styles/blob/master/sage-vancouver-brackets.csl
    and should become available in Mendeley by tomorrow or so. The SJPH style is switched to that version, too.
Sign In or Register to comment.