> If one is assessing a review paper with 
> a hundred or more citations, the task 
> can get to be onerous; especially if the 
> authors are careless about spellings, dates, typos, etc.  

Here's what I use to minimize review citation aggravation and time.
Not 100%, but pretty amazing as compared to banging rocks together with the
usual approaches.
Well worth spending the time to learn how to use.

Find the cited work, and even "repair the citation", if garbled:
Recite - https://reciteworks.com

The Open Citation project attempts the same thing, but not as amazing as
above:
Paracite - http://opcit.eprints.org

Parsers to tame the beastie of incompatible "standards":
AnyStyle - https://anystyle.io/
ParsCit - https://github.com/knmnyn/ParsCit
FreeCite - http://freecite.library.brown.edu/

Archive your own links for a bibliography with permalinks:
https://apps.crossref.org/simpleTextQuery/

Archive web pages for a bibliography before they change/move:
http://www.webcitation.org
https://shrinktheweb.snapito.io
http://www.freezepage.com

The best citation frustration I've seen in a long time is on Wikipedia, of
all places:
https://t.co/pXWTEExny0
In the " List of Cetacean Species", missing photos are noted "(cetacean
needed)".

             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html