[PRE REVIEW]: BibDedupe: An Open-Source Python Library for Bibliographic Record Deduplication

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@geritwagner<!--end-author-handle-- (Gerit Wagner) Repository: https://github.com/CoLRev-Environment/bib-dedupe Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): paper Version: 0.7.0 Editor: !--editor-->@atrisovic<!--end-editor-- Reviewers: @timClicks, @DrMattG Managing EiC: Arfon Smith

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/b954027d06d602c106430e275fe72130"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/b954027d06d602c106430e275fe72130/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/b954027d06d602c106430e275fe72130/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/b954027d06d602c106430e275fe72130)

Author instructions

Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @geritwagner. Currently, there isn't a JOSS editor assigned to your paper.

@geritwagner if you have any suggestions for potential reviewers then please mention them here in this thread (without tagging them with an @). You can search the list of people that have already agreed to review and may be suitable for this submission.

Editor instructions

The JOSS submission bot @editorialbot is here to help you find and assign reviewers and start the main review. To find out what @editorialbot can do for you type:

@editorialbot commands

[editorialbot]

Hello human, I'm @editorialbot, a robot that can help you with some common editorial tasks.

For a list of things I can do to help you, just type:

@editorialbot commands

For example, to regenerate the paper pdf after making changes in the paper's md or bib files, type:

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88  T=0.02 s (532.6 files/s, 93447.4 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
XML                              1              4              0            835
Markdown                         1             84              0            242
YAML                             6             15              0            221
TeX                              1             18              0            160
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                             9            121              0           1458
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 3490

[editorialbot]

Failed to discover a valid open source license

[editorialbot]

Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

OK DOIs

- 10.1186/s12915-023-01686-z is OK
- 10.5281/zenodo.3559043 is OK
- 10.3163/1536-5050.104.3.014 is OK
- 10.1145/3377878 is OK
- 10.1186/2046-4053-4-6 is OK
- 10.1126/sciadv.abi8021 is OK
- 10.1186/1471-2288-9-10 is OK
- 10.3748/wjg.v23.i39.7198 is OK
- 10.1038/s42256-020-00287-7 is OK
- 10.1126/science.ade4585 is OK
- 10.1016/j.jsis.2021.101694 is OK
- 10.1136/bmj-2022-072428 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- 10.17705/1jais.00630 may be a valid DOI for title: (Re) considering the concept of literature review reproducibility

INVALID DOIs

- 10.1177/109442810629663 is INVALID

[editorialbot]

:warning: An error happened when generating the pdf.

[geritwagner]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

:point_right::page_facing_up: Download article proof :page_facing_up: View article proof on GitHub :page_facing_up: :point_left:

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

pygetpapers: a Python library for automated retrieval of scientific literature Submitting author: @ayush4921 Handling editor: @chartgerink (Retired) Reviewers: @khinsen, @VeroniqueLegrand, @kjappelbaum Similarity score: 0.8166

BIDSonym: a BIDS App for the pseudo-anonymization of neuroimaging datasets Submitting author: @peerherholz Handling editor: @oliviaguest (Active) Reviewers: @deep-introspection, @chrisgorgo, @neuromusic Similarity score: 0.8101

LISC: A Python Package for Scientific Literature Collection and Analysis Submitting author: @TomDonoghue Handling editor: @danielskatz (Active) Reviewers: @timClicks, @linuxscout Similarity score: 0.8094

Adeft: Acromine-based Disambiguation of Entities from Text with applications to the biomedical literature Submitting author: @johnbachman Handling editor: @brainstorm (Retired) Reviewers: @GullyAPCBurns, @gbader Similarity score: 0.8065

DataLad: distributed system for joint management of code, data, and their relationship Submitting author: @yarikoptic Handling editor: @arokem (Retired) Reviewers: @szorowi1, @jkanche Similarity score: 0.8050

⚠️ Note to editors: If these papers look like they might be a good match, click through to the review issue for that paper and invite one or more of the authors before considering asking the reviewers of these papers to review again for JOSS.

[geritwagner]

As reviewers, the following have expertise relevant to the submission: DrMattG (who focuses on systematic reviews and meta-analyis), khinsen (who reviewed pygetpapers), timClicks (who reviewed LISC), danielskatz (who served as an editor for LISC).

I just fixed the affiliation and DOI. Sorry for that. The project is released under an MIT license - not sure why the license file is not recognized.

[arfon]

@geritwagner - could you please merge your main branch into the paper branch so we can use @editorialbot to generate repository statistics?

[geritwagner]

Done. Thank you for the instructions - I did not know that the statistics are generated from the paper branch.

[geritwagner]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

:point_right::page_facing_up: Download article proof :page_facing_up: View article proof on GitHub :page_facing_up: :point_left:

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

pygetpapers: a Python library for automated retrieval of scientific literature Submitting author: @ayush4921 Handling editor: @chartgerink (Retired) Reviewers: @khinsen, @VeroniqueLegrand, @kjappelbaum Similarity score: 0.8166

BIDSonym: a BIDS App for the pseudo-anonymization of neuroimaging datasets Submitting author: @peerherholz Handling editor: @oliviaguest (Active) Reviewers: @deep-introspection, @chrisgorgo, @neuromusic Similarity score: 0.8101

LISC: A Python Package for Scientific Literature Collection and Analysis Submitting author: @TomDonoghue Handling editor: @danielskatz (Active) Reviewers: @timClicks, @linuxscout Similarity score: 0.8094

Adeft: Acromine-based Disambiguation of Entities from Text with applications to the biomedical literature Submitting author: @johnbachman Handling editor: @brainstorm (Retired) Reviewers: @GullyAPCBurns, @gbader Similarity score: 0.8065

DataLad: distributed system for joint management of code, data, and their relationship Submitting author: @yarikoptic Handling editor: @arokem (Retired) Reviewers: @szorowi1, @jkanche Similarity score: 0.8050

⚠️ Note to editors: If these papers look like they might be a good match, click through to the review issue for that paper and invite one or more of the authors before considering asking the reviewers of these papers to review again for JOSS.

[geritwagner]

@editorialbot check repository

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88  T=2.68 s (23.9 files/s, 2969.4 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Python                          38            817            561           4080
XML                              5              4              0            840
Markdown                         5            166              0            425
YAML                             6             15              0            221
TeX                              1             18              0            161
TOML                             1             12              1             59
reStructuredText                 4             86            202             54
Jupyter Notebook                 2              0            134             33
DOS Batch                        1              8              1             26
make                             1              4              7              9
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            64           1130            906           5908
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 3496

[atrisovic]

@editorialbot assign me as editor

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @atrisovic is now the editor

[atrisovic]

Hi @geritwagner I will be your editor and do my best to help with the review. I see you already had a few suggestions for potential reviewers. I will start contacting reviewers and hopefully we can start with the review soon.

[atrisovic]

@editorialbot add @timClicks as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@timClicks added to the reviewers list!

[geritwagner]

Hi Ana and Tim, thank you for serving as editor and reviewer on my submission. I look forward to your feedback and any improvements I can implement.

[atrisovic]

@editorialbot add @DrMattG as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@DrMattG added to the reviewers list!

[atrisovic]

@editorialbot start review

[editorialbot]

OK, I've started the review over in https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/6318.