↓ Skip to main content

Good Research Practice in Non-Clinical Pharmacology and Biomedicine

Overview of attention for book
Cover of 'Good Research Practice in Non-Clinical Pharmacology and Biomedicine'

Table of Contents

  1. Altmetric Badge
    Book Overview
  2. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 274 Quality in Non-GxP Research Environment
  3. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 275 Guidelines and Initiatives for Good Research Practice
  4. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 276 Learning from Principles of Evidence-Based Medicine to Optimize Nonclinical Research Practices
  5. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 277 General Principles of Preclinical Study Design
  6. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 278 Resolving the Tension Between Exploration and Confirmation in Preclinical Biomedical Research
  7. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 279 Blinding and Randomization
  8. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 280 Out of Control? Managing Baseline Variability in Experimental Studies with Control Groups
  9. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 281 Quality of Research Tools
  10. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 282 Genetic Background and Sex: Impact on Generalizability of Research Findings in Pharmacology Studies
  11. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 284 Minimum Information and Quality Standards for Conducting, Reporting, and Organizing In Vitro Research.
  12. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 285 Minimum Information in In Vivo Research.
  13. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 286 A Reckless Guide to P-values
  14. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 288 Data Storage
  15. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 290 Publishers’ Responsibilities in Promoting Data Quality and Reproducibility
  16. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 291 Quality Governance in Biomedical Research
  17. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 292 Good Research Practice: Lessons from Animal Care and Use
  18. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 293 Research Collaborations and Quality in Research: Foes or Friends?
  19. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 294 Costs of Implementing Quality in Research Practice
Attention for Chapter: Electronic Lab Notebooks and Experimental Design Assistants.
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

1 blog
1 X user


25 Dimensions

Readers on

23 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Chapter title
Electronic Lab Notebooks and Experimental Design Assistants.
Book title
Good Research Practice in Non-Clinical Pharmacology and Biomedicine
Published in
Handbook of experimental pharmacology, September 2019
DOI 10.1007/164_2019_287
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-3-03-033655-4, 978-3-03-033656-1

Björn Gerlach, Christopher Untucht, Alfred Stefan


Documentation of experiments is essential for best research practice and ensures scientific transparency and data integrity. Traditionally, the paper lab notebook (pLN) has been employed for documentation of experimental procedures, but over the course of the last decades, the introduction of electronic tools has changed the research landscape and the way that work is performed. Nowadays, almost all data acquisition, analysis, presentation and archiving are done with electronic tools. The use of electronic tools provides many new possibilities, as well as challenges, particularly with respect to documentation and data quality. One of the biggest hurdles is the management of data on different devices with a substantial amount of metadata. Transparency and integrity have to be ensured and must be reflected in documentation within LNs. With this in mind, electronic LNs (eLN) were introduced to make documentation of experiments more straightforward, with the development of enhanced functionality leading gradually to their more widespread use. This chapter gives a general overview of eLNs in the scientific environment with a focus on the advantages of supporting quality and transparency of the research. It provides guidance on adopting an eLN and gives an example on how to set up unique Study-IDs in labs in order to maintain and enhance best practices. Overall, the chapter highlights the central role of eLNs in supporting the documentation and reproducibility of experiments.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 13%
Researcher 3 13%
Other 2 9%
Librarian 2 9%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 7 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 35%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Computer Science 1 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 4%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 8 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 March 2022.
All research outputs
of 23,443,716 outputs
Outputs from Handbook of experimental pharmacology
of 650 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 344,453 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Handbook of experimental pharmacology
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,443,716 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 650 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 344,453 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.