ReviewJournal of anatomy2005
Anatomics: the intersection of anatomy and bioinformatics.
Review in Journal of anatomy, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 43 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bridging mouse and human anatomies; a knowledge-based approach to comparative anatomy for disease model phenotyping.Mammalian genome : official journal of the International Mammalian Genome Society · 2023Review
- Comprehensive anatomic ontologies for lung development: A comparison of alveolar formation and maturation within mouse and human lung.Journal of biomedical semantics · 2019Article
- Spatial expression of transcription factors in Drosophila embryonic organ development.Genome biology · 2013Article
- Uberon, an integrative multi-species anatomy ontology.Genome biology · 2012Article
- Genome profiling (GP) method based classification of insects: congruence with that of classical phenotype-based one.PloS one · 2011Article
- Linking human diseases to animal models using ontology-based phenotype annotation.PLoS biology · 2009Article
- An ontology for Xenopus anatomy and development.BMC developmental biology · 2008Article
- A prototype symbolic model of canonical functional neuroanatomy of the motor system.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2008Article
- Systems developmental biology: the use of ontologies in annotating models and in identifying gene function within and across species.Mammalian genome : official journal of the International Mammalian Genome Society · 2007Review
- Experience in Aligning Anatomical Ontologies.International journal on Semantic Web and information systems · 2007Article
- The NeuARt II system: a viewing tool for neuroanatomical data based on published neuroanatomical atlases.BMC bioinformatics · 2006Article
- A high-resolution anatomical rat atlas.Journal of anatomy · 2006Article
- The impact of the NIH public access policy on literature informatics: What role can the neuroinformaticists play?Neuroinformatics · 2005Review
- Of mice and men: aligning mouse and human anatomies.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2005Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Computational resources are now using the tissue names of the major model organisms so that tissue-associated data can be archived in and retrieved from databases on the basis of developing and adult anatomy. For this to be done, the set of tissues in that organism (its anatome) has to be organized in a way that is computer-comprehensible. Indeed, such formalization is a necessary part of what is becoming known as systems biology, in which explanations of high-level biological phenomena are not only sought in terms of lower-level events, but are articulated within a computational framework. Lists of tissue names alone, however, turn out to be inadequate for this formalization because tissue organization is essentially hierarchical and thus cannot easily be put into tables, the natural format of relational databases. The solution now adopted is to organize the anatomy of each organism as a hierarchy of tissue names and linking relationships (e.g. the tibia is PART OF the leg, the tibia IS-A bone) within what are known as ontologies. In these, a unique ID is assigned to each tissue and this can be used within, for example, gene-expression databases to link data to tissue organization, and also used to query other data sources (interoperability), while inferences about the anatomy can be made within the ontology on the basis of the relationships. There are now about 15 such anatomical ontologies, many of which are linked to organism databases; these ontologies are now publicly available at the Open Biological Ontologies website (http://obo.sourceforge.net) from where they can be freely downloaded and viewed using standard tools. This review considers how anatomy is formalized within ontologies, together with the problems that have had to be solved for this to be done. It is suggested that the appropriate term for the analysis, computer formulation and use of the anatome is anatomics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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 OpenQuestion graph.