Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33109751›Full record

ArticlemSystems2020

Lost and Found: Re-searching and Re-scoring Proteomics Data Aids Genome Annotation and Improves Proteome Coverage.

Patrick Willems, Igor Fijalkowski, Petra Van Damme

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in mSystems, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Comparative genomics ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2024
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. MS Amanda 2.0: Advancements in the standalone implementation.Rapid communications in mass spectrometry : RCM · 2021
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Are Antisense Proteins in Prokaryotes Functional?Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2020
    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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Patrick WillemsDepartment of Biochemistry and Microbiology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Igor FijalkowskiDepartment of Biochemistry and Microbiology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Petra Van DammeDepartment of Biochemistry and Microbiology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium petra.vandamme@ugent.be.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9090-027X
Ghent University · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prokaryotic genome annotation is heavily dependent on automated gene annotation pipelines that are prone to propagate errors and underestimate genome complexity. We describe an optimized proteogenomic workflow that uses ribosome profiling (ribo-seq) and proteomic data for

Indexed as

alternative translation initiationbacterial genome (re)annotationchimeric spectraDeinococcus radioduransriboproteogenomicsSalmonellaspectral re-scoring

Identifiers

PMID33109751
PMCPMC7593589
OpenAlexW3094689652

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.