This document summarizes a webinar on using electronic laboratory notebooks (eLNs). The webinar featured a presentation by Dr. Ulrich Dirnagl on his experience using eLNs to make research teams more efficient. He believes paper notebooks are outdated and that eLNs can help address the reproducibility crisis in research. The webinar covered the benefits of eLNs like collaboration, data sharing, and compliance with regulations. It also reviewed different types of eLNs and pricing models. While implementation challenges exist, eLNs were found to improve oversight, record keeping, and transparency if selected and supported properly.
Similar to Using electronic laboratory notebooks in the academic life sciences: a group leader's experience on how they can make research teams more efficient
How Logilab ELN helps organizations to maintain ALCOA Data IntegrityAgaram Technologies
Similar to Using electronic laboratory notebooks in the academic life sciences: a group leader's experience on how they can make research teams more efficient (20)
Using electronic laboratory notebooks in the academic life sciences: a group leader's experience on how they can make research teams more efficient
1. Digital Scholar
Webinar
January 10, 2018
Hosted by the Southern California Clinical and Translational Science Institute (SC CTSI)
University of Southern California (USC) and Children’s Hospital Los Angeles (CHLA)
2. Katja Reuter, PhD,
Director of the Digital
Scholar Program
About Today’s Session
Project management
Team management
4. Today’s Learning Objectives
Describe the potential and strengths of using electronic Laboratory
Notebook (eLN) solutions
Identify different types of eLNs
Describe basic features of eLN and how they are used
Describe potential weaknesses of using eLNs and how to address them
5. Ulrich Dirnagl, MD
Today’s Speaker
Topic: Using electronic Laboratory Notebooks in the
academic life sciences: a group leader's experience on
how they can make research teams more efficient
Speaker: Ulrich Dirnagl, MD, Director, Department of
Experimental Neurology, Charité Universitätsmedizin
Berlin, Germany, and Founding Director, QUEST, BIH
Center for Transforming Biomedical Research, Berlin
Institute of Health, Germany
6. Questions: Please use the Q&A Feature
1. Click on the tab here to
access Q&A
2. Ask and post question here
1
2
7. USING ELECTRONIC LABORATORY NOTEBOOKS IN THE
ACADEMIC LIFE SCIENCES:
A GROUP LEADER'S EXPERIENCE ON HOW THEY CAN MAKE RESEARCH TEAMS
MORE EFFICIENT
Ulrich Dirnagl
University of Southern California 1/10/2018
8. I strongly believe that paper laboratory notebooks are no longer state of
the art.
There are a number of competitors offering high quality ELNs (Benchhive,
LabCollector, SciNote, Labfolder …. For an extensive but still incomplete
list see
https://www.labsexplorer.com/c/2017-review-of-best-electronic-
laboratory-notebooks_6 )
Labfolder is a startup founded by scientists in the Berlin area.
I do not own any shares or do not receive any royalties or benefits from
Labfolder. I just happen to have extensive experience with it.
Disclaimer / Conflict of interest statement
17. 90 sec tour
Get a quick overview of
the basic features.
Teamwork
See how teams can
discuss data and share
knowledge.
Word and Excel
import
See how we support
the most generic
formats used in
research.
Manage a team
Watch the team
management and
organization tool in
action.
Watch more of videos on Labfolder’s YouTube channel.
Video tours
31. Communication &
Teamwork
Tasks & notifications for
working together better.
QM & Compliance
Integrated features for
simplified compliance in ISO,
GxP and others.
Backups & Archiving
central server for central
management.
Roles & Access
Rights & roles and access
integrated.
Document management
Popular formats and digital
signatures are supported.
Inventory & Samples
Integrated materials
management.
Many solutions in one platform
32. Implementation support
● Onboarding of group
leaders and
scientists.
● Continuous training
of (new) scientists
and students.
Installation
& update support
● Supported
installation and
regular updates.
● Technical IT support
above the operating
system.
Integration
support
● Supported API
integration of in-
house solutions for
linking, long-term
archiving,
publication, etc.
User
support
● In-tool ticket system.
● Telephone and email
support for
scientists.
Company support
33. GLP
(OECD Guidelines on good laboratory practice)
GLP
requirement
Labfolder
Feature
Compliance
Access control Login, project access
rights
Full audit trail History function
Digital
signatures
Signing and witnessing
Daily backups Provided by labfolder
Data center
protected
Provided by data center
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
CFR 21 Part 11
(FDA guidelines for digital signatures)
Requirement Labfolder
Feature
Compliance
Signature
(biometric /
credentials)
Signing and witnessing
Document
integrity
Audit Trail, Controlled
deletion, Hash sum
Access
management
Login, author control,
access rights
management
✔
✔
✔
Compliant to regulated environments
34. EXTENDED EDITION (PREMIUM)
Groups > 3 and additional group features
Industry Academia
Cloud 39€ /user/ month 15€ /user/ month
Server
39€ /user/ month
+ 5.000€ one-off
installation fee
15€ /user/ month
+ 2.500€ one-off
installation fee
FREE TRIAL
Teams with up
to 3 members.
EXTENDED EDITION FOR LARGE ACCOUNTS /
CAMPUSES
For organizations with >500 users
✔ One solution for the entire organization.
✔ No user limit, billing for active users only.
✔ Individual account management and
support.
INTEGRATE
Partner with
labfolder to
develop and
monetize new
features or
connect own
solutions.
Pricing models (example)
35. Horses for courses – different types of LNs
Feature Paper LN Generic,
electronic
documentation
system (Word,
EverNote, …)
ELNs,
(iLabber,
Labfolder,
eCat…)
High-End
ELNs
(LIMS)
Digital documentation (Text, graphics)* -
Digital documentaion (Free hand drawing)* - ()
Text search* -
Searching projects* -
Exchange of data* -
Management of users, logging of entries, time stamp,
audit trail*
() manually -
21CFR11 Compliance* - -
Management of inventories (e.g. probes, chemicals) - - ()
Workflows (tasks, experiments) - - ()
Linking instruments (e.g. scales, readers, microscopes) - - ()
Analysis of raw data - -
Cost low low Intermed. high
Do not meet minimum
requirements
(time stamping,
copy/deletion protection,
user management, 21 CFR
11, etc.)
Too expensive, too
many features, too
complex, not user
friendly
36.
37. Challenges
• More expensive than paper LN
• Integration within institutional IT
• Administration, user support day to day
• Local (group) vs institutional solution
• Cloud vs institutional server
• Device integration
• Regulatory issues (GSP, Unions)
• Parallel solutions (paper + eLN)
38. The future (?)
• eLN fully integrated into data collection, collaboration, data dissemination
• Integration with open data [transparency]
• Publication from within eLN [data journals]
• Integration into structured QM Systems
• Auditing (internal/external) [trust]
39. Take home
• After an initial training phase users are very happy and don‘t want to
change back to paper
• Most popular novel features: Collaboration, data storage, templates,
accessibility from any computer, Pis: oversight, record keeping, GSP
• Start with pilot, select group that is motivated
• Try to implement solution from one provider
• Take concerns of potential users seriously (data security, sharing of
data…) - do not enforce implementation
• Secure support of institutional IT
• Provide good support (in particular onboarding)
40. Q u e s t i o n s
Program director: Katja Reuter, PhD
Email: katja.reuter@usc.edu
Twitter: @dmsci
Next Digital Scholar Webinar
I n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t
t h e p r o g r a m
http://sc-ctsi.org/digital-scholar/
Date & Time: Feb 7, 2018 | 12-1PM PST
Topic: Using alternative scholarly metrics to showcase the impact
of your research: An introduction for researchers
Speaker: Caroline Muglia, MS, Co-Associate Dean for Collections
and Technical Services at University of Southern California
Register at: http://bit.ly/2CLAx5C
Editor's Notes
Challenges of today’s participant recruitment in the health sciences
Crowdsourcing through Amazon’s Mechanical Turk (Mturk) as a new solution to complement existing study recruitment approaches
Readily available research study participants and streamlined recruiting and payment systems
Potential and limitations of online recruitment, e.g., sample composition, data quality
Digital technologies are shaping the way experiments are performed, results captured, and findings disseminated. We will explore what an electronic Laboratory Notebook (eLN) affords a biomedical researcher, what it requires, and how one should go about implementing it?
Thank you for the invitation, it is indeed a great honor for me to share our experience in improving the quality of our preclinical research via structured quality management.
My first webinar in the role of the speaker, so this is new and exciting for me! Please let me know right away if you have trouble understanding me or problems with the connection
: Brief intro
* Who are we / What are we doing (translational stroke research) / What organization are
we (large academic institution, with all its idiosynchrasies: perverse reward and incentive
system - publish or perisch, short contracts, lots of students, PIs who also work in clinical
medicine, supervision not a strength...).
* We have a 10 year history in the quest for quality. Obtained funding for it, and are
meanwhile sort of an (inter)national reference center for QM in academia.
Bottom line: Academia is an environment in which QM is unknown at best. If it is known, it is
aversive (as stifling creativity). Does not help in careers (quite to the opposite), no money
available for QM, university leadership indifferent to opposed.
I Motivation: "Houston, we have a problem" (very brief)
* Stroke research: Total translational roadblock
* Reproducibility crisis
II Diagnosis (focus on internal validity)
* Low internal validity (All sorts of biases)
* [Low external validity] -> will only be mentioned
* [Lack of statistical power] -> will only be mentioned
* [Negative publication bias] -> will only be mentioned
III Therapy (focus on internal validity)
* Improve study design (randomisation, blinding, in/exclusion criteria etc.)
* Improve analysis
* Create value/quality culture
* Motivate staff (students, PIs, technicians, postdocs) and help with implementation and
daily quality oriented work
IV Implementation
* Brief history of our process (Started with ISO9001; Shortcomings of ISO9001)
* Current status: Building own QM, based on our experience with ISO, develop and
provide 'toolbox'
* Are at the same time embedded in large European collaboration (funded by industry and
European Union) which is charged to come up with a ‘QM system’ for academia
* Snapshot of where we are: 'House of Quality'
V What's in the toolbox?
2 Examples:
* Electronic laboratory notebook
* Lab CIRS
VI Take home messages
Its all about
* Culture
* Leadership
* A process ('the journey is the reward')
* Supporting structures etc. can serve as 'scaffold' for and to crystalize the process but are
meaningless without the culture change
* It takes time
* It takes financial resources
* We need solid evidence that time and resources are well spent