Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18446237›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2008

An analysis of the abstracts presented at the annual meetings of the Society for Neuroscience from 2001 to 2006.

John M Lin, Jason W Bohland, Peter Andrews, Gully A P C Burns, Cara B Allen, Partha P Mitra

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 37% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Is subjective duration a signature of coding efficiency?Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2009
    Review
  5. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

John M LinCold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, New York, United States of America. jlin@cshl.edu
Jason W Bohland
Peter Andrews
Gully A P C Burns
Cara B Allen
Partha P Mitra
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory · USUniversity of Southern California · US

Funding

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT OF THE NEUROSCIENTIFIC LITERATURER01LM007061 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI BURNS, GULLY APC · 2001 to 2005
$1.9M
NLM NIH HHS R01 LM007061
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Annual meeting abstracts published by scientific societies often contain rich arrays of information that can be computationally mined and distilled to elucidate the state and dynamics of the subject field. We extracted and processed abstract data from the Society for Neuroscience (SFN) annual meeting abstracts during the period 2001-2006 in order to gain an objective view of contemporary neuroscience. An important first step in the process was the application of data cleaning and disambiguation methods to construct a unified database, since the data were too noisy to be of full utility in the raw form initially available. Using natural language processing, text mining, and other data analysis techniques, we then examined the demographics and structure of the scientific collaboration network, the dynamics of the field over time, major research trends, and the structure of the sources of research funding. Some interesting findings include a high geographical concentration of neuroscience research in the north eastern United States, a surprisingly large transient population (66% of the authors appear in only one out of the six studied years), the central role played by the study of neurodegenerative disorders in the neuroscience community, and an apparent growth of behavioral/systems neuroscience with a corresponding shrinkage of cellular/molecular neuroscience over the six year period. The results from this work will prove useful for scientists, policy makers, and funding agencies seeking to gain a complete and unbiased picture of the community structure and body of knowledge encapsulated by a specific scientific domain.

Indexed as

Abstracting and IndexingCongresses as TopicNeurosciencesSocieties, MedicalAlgorithmsAuthorshipCluster AnalysisDemographyGeographyLinguisticsNational Institutes of Health (U.S.)Research Support as TopicUnited States

Identifiers

PMID18446237
PMCPMC2324197
OpenAlexW2024935097

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
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 OpenQuestion graph.