> Personally I'd never include Scihub into my workflow in a way that shows up in a publication. Clearly it was not meant to. Especially if you look at referenc

> Personally I'd never include Scihub into my workflow in a way that shows up in a publication. Clearly it was not meant to. Especially if you look at reference 4 here [1], it looks like the internal format of whatever reference database the authors used, was accidentally leaked into to references. Probably missing commas somewhere. HYPERLINK “http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11661-007-9094-9”\t“_blank” [1] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1875389215017782?via%3Dihub#bibl0005 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187538921...