Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37710019›Full record

ReviewNature methods2023

Principles and challenges of modeling temporal and spatial omics data.

Britta Velten, Oliver Stegle

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature methods, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
54citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

54 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Spatial architecture of development and disease.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2026
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  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

2 authors.

Britta VeltenDivision of Computational Genomics and Systems Genetics, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany. britta.velten@cos.uni-heidelberg.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8397-3515
Oliver StegleDivision of Computational Genomics and Systems Genetics, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany. o.stegle@dkfz.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8818-7193

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Studies with temporal or spatial resolution are crucial to understand the molecular dynamics and spatial dependencies underlying a biological process or system. With advances in high-throughput omic technologies, time- and space-resolved molecular measurements at scale are increasingly accessible, providing new opportunities to study the role of timing or structure in a wide range of biological questions. At the same time, analyses of the data being generated in the context of spatiotemporal studies entail new challenges that need to be considered, including the need to account for temporal and spatial dependencies and compare them across different scales, biological samples or conditions. In this Review, we provide an overview of common principles and challenges in the analysis of temporal and spatial omics data. We discuss statistical concepts to model temporal and spatial dependencies and highlight opportunities for adapting existing analysis methods to data with temporal and spatial dimensions.

Identifiers

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
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.