allow users to link duplicate entries so that they are no longer duplicated. My list has multiple duplications.

Completed

Comments

9 comments

  • Ana Cardoso

    Hi,

    Works on your ORCID record are automatically grouped together when they have the same identifiers (such as a DOI or PMID). Looking at your record, the issue seems to be that some of your works were added from Europe Pub Med Central with a PMID and another version was added from Scopus with a DOI and EID. As these works have different identifiers our system treats them like different items.

    You can fix this by creating a new version of the work that has both the PMID and DOI listed. To do this copy the PMID from the version of the work added by Europe Pub Med. Then go to the version added by Scopus and click on the Make a copy and edit button (it looks like a branch) for that work. This will open the new work window prefilled with all the information from the Scopus version. Click the plus sign to add an additional identifier, select PMID (PubMed ID) as the type and paste the PMID you copied into the text field and click Save. You will then see the work listed once on your ORCID record and next to the Preferred Source box you'll see there are 3 different versions available, one from Europe Pub Med Central, one from Scopus and the one you created. For more about the Works section of your ORCID record see http://support.orcid.org/knowledgebase/articles/462032

    Best,
    -Catalina
    ORCID Support

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • brant inman
    I understand that the capacity to edit a record exists. However, if a large number of duplicates is present, then the manual "edit each record" approach is suboptimal. Rather, the ability to "identify duplicate records" approach would be better. Endnote, for example, does this by matching across a number of things (title, author lists, volume, number, pages, etc...). If a high probability match, then make the user tell you if the potentially matching records are the same or not. If same, merge all identifiers automatically.
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Axel G. Rossberg
    It's a shame that the ORCID team brush off this very popular request (944 votes) with a simple "do it yourself, baby". I fully agree with comment by brant. Duplicate removal should be automated by the system as much as possible. Right now, it is just too awkward and, sorry, I won't do it. (I have to maintain publication lists for other reasons elsewhere!) What adds to the pain right now is that web interface is terribly slow to respond and forces you to scroll up and down all the time. Each duplicate removal would take me about 1 minute and half a cup of coffee to stay awake. Considering that I would have to do this EACH TIME I IMPORT AN UPDATED PUBLICATION LIST, it's just a total waste of time. Dear ORCID team, please fix this ASAP!
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Geoff
    In my account the _majority_ of works have duplicate records. Even when the title, ISBN, and DOI are all identical I have duplicate records. The presence of duplicate records really diminishes the value of ORCID but with 930 works listed there's no way I'm going to edit them by hand.
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • bbgems
    Grapple one of the most amazing upgraded version of boom beach resources generator for boundless activity through http://bbhackonline.com for boundless activity by upgrading your resources building , support building and your troops for stronger defend enemy raids and to conquer there bases.
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • buddy
    It is stupid that e.g. Scopus and PMC Europe introduce duplicate records of works into my profile. Much of this problem seems to be due to the non-willingness of the big sources (Scopus!) and perhaps also PMC etc to cross-reference their IDs for manuscripts. It is crazy that each author should manually curate each record just because those who promote the use of ORCID are too lazy to implement this!
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • ORCID (APAC)
    Hi Buddy, We're sorry to hear that Scopus and PME Europe do not send more PID data to help make automatic grouping of works easier on the ORCID record. During our conversations with our members who update researchers' ORCID records, we do encourage that they include more than one PID where they know it -- this data helps you and the entire ORCID community immensely. We encourage you to also be contacting these services and letting them know that you want more data from them. In our experience, it is the users of their systems who have the most influence in effecting change. That said, we have on the list of future projects a way to make grouping easier in the User Interface (i.e. on your personal record at https://orcid.org/my-orcid ). It would be great if you could provide some ideas of what you would like to see. For example, a drag and drop method? Or some other method? Please note that it is unlikely that we would opt for having the ORCID Registry automatically delete duplicates, as has been proposed. This is because one of our core principles (https://orcid.org/about/what-is-orcid/principles) is that you, the individual, have control over your ORCID iD, what data is on your record, and who sees that data. Warm regards, ORCID Community Engagement and Support
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Jan Genoe
    DOI names are case insensitive ( see https://www.doi.org/doi_handbook/2_Numbering.html). Scopus sends my DOI's to ORCID using capital letters whereas ResearcherID uses small caps. Even when there are no other differences, ORCID considers these as different. However, a conversion to e.g. capital letters on DOI should be easy to implement before any comparison is made by ORCID. Dear ORCID team, please fix this ASAP!
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Ghislaine Dehaene
    I agree with previous comments. When the duplicates are too numerous, doing one by one (we can not even select them all in a list) is not doable and thus will stay like that What is the use of such a database? At least google scholar is not as stupid.
    0
    Comment actions Permalink

Please sign in to leave a comment.