Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33858487›Full record

ArticleGenome biology2021

Improving the completeness of public metadata accompanying omics studies.

Anushka Rajesh, Yutong Chang, Malak S Abedalthagafi, Annie Wong-Beringer, Michael I Love, Serghei Mangul

Abstract readEditorial
In one paragraph

Article in Genome biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. (Pan)genomic analysis of twoMicrobiology spectrum · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Metadata integrity in bioinformatics: Bridging the gap between data and knowledge.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2023
    Review
  12. Metadata retrieval from sequence databases with ffq.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Open science, data sharing and solidarity: who benefits?History and philosophy of the life sciences · 2021
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

6 authors.

Anushka RajeshDepartment of Pharmacology and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, 90089, USA. anushkar@usc.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-7729-0865
Yutong ChangDepartment of Pharmacology and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, 90089, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4701-7868
Malak S AbedalthagafiGenomics Research Department, King Fahad Medical City and King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0003-1786-3366
Annie Wong-BeringerDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, 90089, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3302-1409
Michael I LoveDepartment of Biostatistics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, 27516, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8401-0545
Serghei MangulDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, 90089, USA. serghei.mangul@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0003-4770-3443

Funding

A Modular Framework for Accurate, Interpretable, and Reproducible Analysis of Long Read RNA-Seq DataR01HG009937 · NHGRI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI Michael Isaiah Love, Robert Patro · 2018 to 2026
$2.8M
NHGRI NIH HHS R01 HG009937
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as

Access to InformationDatabases, FactualMetadataHumans

Identifiers

PMID33858487
PMCPMC8048353

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.