Plan the check by recording the supplement's identifier, version, and access date at the moment you consult it, then compare those details against the version your manuscript describes. This gives you a stable citation and a record of any version drift between what you read and what you cite.
-
Capture the identifier. Record the supplement's DOI or other persistent identifier exactly as it appears in the source record. A DOI lookup through Crossref returns the metadata deposited for that DOI, and DataCite's REST API exposes DOI metadata for works and related entities, so either route can confirm what identifier the record carries.
-
Record the version. Note the version label or number shown in the record alongside the identifier. Keep the version attached to the identifier so the pair can be re-checked later.
-
Log the access date. Write down the date you consulted the supplement. This fixes when the version you recorded was current and lets you interpret a later mismatch.
-
Compare with the manuscript. Open the manuscript's citation of the supplement and check that the identifier, version, and described content match your record. If the manuscript names a different version, note the drift explicitly.
-
Resolve or flag drift. When versions differ, decide whether to update the manuscript to the version you recorded or to re-consult the cited version. Record which choice you made and why.
-
Format the citation. Build the final reference using the structure Citing Medicine provides for the relevant publication type, including datasets and websites where applicable, and carry the version and access date into that entry.
What the check produces
The output is a citation entry that pairs the identifier with the version and access date, plus a short note on any version drift. That note tells a co-author or reviewer which version the manuscript describes and what changed, so the decision to update or retain the citation is visible.