The 2006 automated function prediction meeting.

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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

1. In-depth performance evaluation of PFP and ESG sequence-based function prediction methods in CAFA 2011 experiment.BMC bioinformatics · 2013
   Article
2. How to evaluate performance of prediction methods? Measures and their interpretation in variation effect analysis.BMC genomics · 2012
   Article
3. Protein function prediction: towards integration of similarity metrics.Current opinion in structural biology · 2011
   Review
4. Exploration of uncharted regions of the protein universe.PLoS biology · 2009
   Article
5. ANNIE: integrated de novo protein sequence annotation.Nucleic acids research · 2009
   Article
6. Rapid annotation of anonymous sequences from genome projects using semantic similarities and a weighting scheme in gene ontology.PloS one · 2009
   Article

Corrections and comments

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

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as