Citation missing for legacy project

[bemoody]

Looks like citations are still a little garbled.

I don't remember what exactly it looked like prior to PR #377, but looking at it now (e.g. https://alpha.physionet.org/content/mitdb/1.0.0/), I see:

MIT-BIH Arrhythmia Database
Published: Feb. 24, 2005. Version: 1.0.0

Please also include the standard citation for PhysioNet:
Goldberger AL, Amaral LAN, Glass L, Hausdorff JM, Ivanov PCh,
Mark RG, Mietus JE, Moody GB, Peng C-K, Stanley
HE. PhysioBank, PhysioToolkit, and PhysioNet: Components of a
New Research Resource for Complex Physiologic
Signals (2003). Circulation. 101(23):e215-e220.

The current template code has:

{% if not project.is_legacy %}
 <strong>When using this resource, please cite:</strong>
 <p>{{ project.citation_text }}</p>
{% endif %}

<strong>Please also include the standard citation for PhysioNet:</strong>
  <p>Goldberger AL, Amaral LAN, Glass L, Hausdorff JM, Ivanov PCh, Mark RG,
  Mietus JE, Moody GB, Peng C-K, Stanley HE. PhysioBank, PhysioToolkit, and
  PhysioNet: Components of a New Research Resource for Complex Physiologic
  Signals (2003). Circulation. 101(23):e215-e220.</p>

We should either direct users to cite the DOI (as with non-legacy projects) or to cite the 'related publication' (which is what some authors have asked us to do in the past.) Either way, can't say "also" if you haven't said something else first :)

[tompollard]

Felipe moved the related publication to a card on the right side, so it no longer appears in the header (hence the extra "also" for legacy projects that are missing the suggested citation). Quickest fix would be to wrap the "also" in an if clause. Okay with that? If not, please could you suggest an alternative?

[bemoody]

Hmm. If you don't want to duplicate the related publication there, which I can understand, what about the DOI?

I assume that the reason it doesn't currently show the DOI there is because we don't currently have the full list of authors for legacy projects (and the authors may not have PhysioNet accounts, either.)

But if there's a DOI, we should be able (in most cases) to pull the actual authors' names from the DOI.

[bemoody]

Did a quick check on this and I was able to pull the authors for 96 out of 110 existing DOIs.

A few of them have an organization listed as the author, and a few just say "The resource you are looking for doesn't exist".

But for the rest we should be able to import the names, which would be a good thing anyway.

[tompollard]

Nice, thanks for looking into this. Let's chat tomorrow about how to import these details into the system (unless you already have this worked out).