Evidence mapPaperPMID 19956660Full record

ReviewPLoS computational biology2009

Nutritional systems biology modeling: from molecular mechanisms to physiology.

Albert A de Graaf, Andreas P Freidig, Baukje De Roos, Neema Jamshidi, Matthias Heinemann, Johan A C Rullmann, Kevin D Hall, Martin Adiels, Ben van Ommen

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in PLoS computational biology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Albert A de GraafBiosciences, TNO Quality of Life, Zeist, The Netherlands. albert.degraaf@tno.nl
Andreas P Freidig
Baukje De Roos
Neema Jamshidi
Matthias Heinemann
Johan A C Rullmann
Kevin D Hall
Martin Adiels
Ben van Ommen

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of computational modeling and simulation has increased in many biological fields, but despite their potential these techniques are only marginally applied in nutritional sciences. Nevertheless, recent applications of modeling have been instrumental in answering important nutritional questions from the cellular up to the physiological levels. Capturing the complexity of today's important nutritional research questions poses a challenge for modeling to become truly integrative in the consideration and interpretation of experimental data at widely differing scales of space and time. In this review, we discuss a selection of available modeling approaches and applications relevant for nutrition. We then put these models into perspective by categorizing them according to their space and time domain. Through this categorization process, we identified a dearth of models that consider processes occurring between the microscopic and macroscopic scale. We propose a "middle-out" strategy to develop the required full-scale, multilevel computational models. Exhaustive and accurate phenotyping, the use of the virtual patient concept, and the development of biomarkers from "-omics" signatures are identified as key elements of a successful systems biology modeling approach in nutrition research--one that integrates physiological mechanisms and data at multiple space and time scales.

Indexed as

Models, BiologicalAnimalsComputer SimulationHumansNutritional StatusSystems Biology

Identifiers

PMID19956660
PMCPMC2777333

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.