blog

Could eLabFTW, an open-source electronic laboratory notebook (ELN), be a straightforward solution to improving the documentation of research data and its reproducibility? The authors of a new Opinion Article published on F1000Research believe so.  

In this interview with authors Michael Hewera (Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf) and Ulf Dietrich Kahlert (University Hospital Magdeburg), we learn more about why ELabFTW surpasses current ELNs, how researchers can benefit, and what this means for open science.

What inspired you to write an Opinion Article on ELNs?

The ongoing crisis of reproducibility in the life sciences shows that the way we handle research data needs to be improved. One basic method for that is the introduction of an electronic laboratory notebook (ELN). We are part of a small preclinical oncology research group focusing on drug testing and disease modeling. As we went through setting up eLabFTW in our lab, we realized that other researchers could benefit from learning about getting started with an open-source ELN. We hope that by sharing our experience, different groups can set up their ELNs faster and with less effort.

Why are ELNs so important for open science?

Improving the sharing of data is considerably easier with an ELN compared to traditional lab books. It is simple to share the final data that will appear in a publication. Also, the documentation, sorting, and searching of raw data are less challenging. Research data is much more transparent with ELNs than the traditional way of documenting research results.

Why are some scientists resistant to using ELNs?

It seems like many researchers have the feeling that using ELNs has many disadvantages. A 2017 study found the main barriers to using an ELN to be a limited budget (in the case of paid ELNs), the time it needs to implement and adapt to a new ELN, and changes to existing work habits. Most of those perceived disadvantages are misconceptions or only exist in a few ELNs. Another reason might be that searching, testing, and implementing an ELN can be a time-consuming process.

Why might eLabFTW cause a shift in how scientists view ELNs?

Firstly, getting started with eLabFTW is very simple. It is a free, open-source software designed by researchers for researchers. In our university, the central IT department hosts eLabFTW, so it was already available for us. However, we also tried setting it up ourselves on a personal computer. We found it to be a very straightforward process—it can be done in less than half a day by a person with average computer skills.

Furthermore, using eLabFTW is equally straightforward and intuitive. The researcher only needs a basic text editor, the experiment, and the database section where information is stored. For those working in admin, there are more features available. Crucially, all the elements are simple to use and self-explanatory.

In your paper, you focus on experimental preclinical or partially clinical labs—would the benefits of ELabFTW still stand in other settings?

In our opinion, any researcher can use eLabFTW in any environment that creates data. Any data that cannot be stored directly in the editor as written text and tables can be attached to the written documentation.

When we were writing our article, we planned to highlight that eLabFTW is not well-suited for physics, math, and engineering researchers as it could not include formulas natively. However, eLabFTW introduced a new feature for formulas as we were working on the paper.

Moreover, eLabFTW is suitable for the sciences but also for psychology, social science, and many more disciplines. Whenever you need to record data safely and efficiently, eLabFTW is an excellent solution. Even researchers working in larger labs stand to benefit from this open-source ELN. Only the hardware used (either a phone, tablet, or computer in the lab) limits the number of users that can use the system simultaneously. Network speed and computing power need to be big enough for big groups. Otherwise, there are no significant adaptations required to the existing lab workflow.

Do you have any predictions for how labs might become increasingly digitized in support of open science in the future?

As most modern lab tools can already output digital data, it requires only a little work to obtain it and store it somewhere. With open source ELNs, it will be straightforward to integrate that data and manage it effortlessly. As a result, we believe that it is only logical that labs will become more and more digitized. This digitization will support open science, as researchers can easily share all the automatically created data.

Are you interested to learn more about eLabFTW as an open science tool for your lab or research group? Read the full Opinion Article today on F1000Research.