Wikidata:Property proposal/PROSPERO

PROSPERO ID edit

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Creative work

Done: PROSPERO ID (P4294) (Talk and documentation)

Description	identifier for a study, in the PROSPERO database
Represents	PROSPERO (Q28736078)
Data type	External identifier
Domain	scholarly article (Q13442814)
Allowed values	CRD\d+
Example	Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors versus placebo in patients with major depressive disorder. A systematic review with meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis (Q28736049) → CRD42013004420
Source	https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ PROSPERO at one year: an evaluation of its utility (Q24288905)
Formatter URL	http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.asp?ID=$1

Motivation

Systematic reviews are important sources of information for Wikipedia et al. PROSPERO is a effort originating in UK, but registers international systematic reviews. They are referenced from publishers (at least BMC), see [1] under "Systematic review registration". — Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 16:59, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Comment: In the exmaple, should the ID be CRD42013004420? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:42, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Good question. I was wondering about that too and was almost going to write about. My rationale for suggesting it without the "CRD" prefix was that all items in PROSPERO seem to have the CRD prefix and that we are using prefixless number for PMCID (P932), a related property. — Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 20:00, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think I am to blame for the prefixless PMCIDs here, and having used these for a while now in all sorts of contexts, I am not sure this is necessarily the best way to go, but I still have a slight personal preference for dropping the prefix. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 12:52, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have got a reply from one of the researchers behind the database. The "4" is also part of the prefix apparently, i.e., the full prefix is "CRD4". The next four digits are the year. Perhaps I should change the format to the full string, e.g., "CRD42013004420". — Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 14:20, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I would prefer the ID with the full number "CRD42013004420". Otherwise

Support. ChristianKl (talk) 14:49, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support I support the creation of the property. It looks like using the CRD4 prefix would be a good idea based on the comments above. YULdigitalpreservation (talk) 14:33, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- I have changed the proposal to include CRD after the comments of YULdigitalpreservation and ChristianKl. — Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 20:15, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
One note of concern is that PROSPERO apparent makes their own DOI. I suppose that such a DOI will "collide" with the DOI of a published article. I am unsure what to do about this. We could simply ignore the PROSPERO DOI. Alternatively a PROSPERO should be regarded as its "own" item and not directly associated with a paper. — Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 20:20, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The description says that the property is about studies while the domain is that it's about scientific articles. Which is correct? ChristianKl (talk) 21:04, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, I suppose there are room for ambiguity here. For instance, Transmission of Zika virus through breast milk and other breastfeeding-related bodily-fluids: A systematic review is the paper while Transmission of Zika virus through breast milk and other breastfeeding-related bodily-fluids: a systematic review of evidence is the study. They might be said to be two slightly different items. I guess we have the same problem in connection with preprints (is a preprint the same as the journal article?). — Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 22:10, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 18:18, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Fnielsen, Pigsonthewing, Daniel Mietchen, ChristianKl, YULdigitalpreservation, ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2: Done ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:17, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]