Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18468558›Full record

ReviewDrug discovery today2008

Protein interaction predictions from diverse sources.

Yin Liu, Inyoung Kim, Hongyu Zhao

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Drug discovery today, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Integration of Heterogeneous Experimental Data Improves Global Map of Human Protein Complexes.ACM-BCB ... ... : the ... ACM Conference on Bioinformatics, Computational Biology and Biomedicine. ACM Conference on Bioinformatics, Computational Biology and Biomedicine · 2019
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Prediction of Protein-Protein Interactions by Evidence Combining Methods.International journal of molecular sciences · 2016
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Rationally designed peptide regulators of protein kinase C.Trends in endocrinology and metabolism: TEM · 2009
    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

3 authors.

Yin LiuDepartment of Neurobiology and Anatomy, University of Texas Medical School at Houston, 6431 Fannin Street, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
Inyoung Kim
Hongyu Zhao

Funding

Yale/NIDA Neuroproteomics Research CenterP30DA018343 · NIDA · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI Marina R Picciotto · 2004 to 2026
$37.1M
STATISTICAL METHODS TO MAP GENES FOR COMPLEX TRAITSR01GM059507 · NIGMS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI ZHAO, HONGYU · 1999 to 2013
$3.6M
NHLBI NIH HHS N01 HV 28286NIDA NIH HHS P30 DA 018343NIDA NIH HHS P30 DA018343NIGMS NIH HHS GM 59507NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM059507
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Protein-protein interactions play an important role in many cellular processes. The availability of a comprehensive and accurate list of protein interactions can facilitate drug target discovery. Recent advances in high-throughput experimental technologies have generated enormous amounts of data and provided valuable resources for studying protein interactions. However, these technologies suffer from high error rates because of their inherent limitations. Therefore, computational approaches capable of incorporating multiple data sources are needed to fully take advantage of the rapid accumulation of data. In this review, we focus on the computational methods that integrate multiple data sources by combining direct measurements on protein interactions from diverse organisms, and by integrating different types of indirect information from various genomic and proteomic approaches.

Indexed as

Protein Interaction MappingAnimalsComputational BiologyHumans

Identifiers

PMID18468558
PMCPMC3164358

What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.