Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18798919›Full record

ReviewImmunology2008

Access to immunology through the Gene Ontology.

Ruth C Lovering, Evelyn B Camon, Judith A Blake, Alexander D Diehl

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Immunology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Dissecting the Immune System through Gene Regulation.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2024
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Primer on the Gene Ontology.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2017
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

4 authors.

Ruth C LoveringDepartment of Medicine, University College London, Rayne Institute, London, UK.
Evelyn B Camon
Judith A Blake
Alexander D Diehl

Funding

Resource ProjectU41HG002273 · NHGRI · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI THOMAS, PAUL D. · 2012 to 2021
$34.7M
Gene Ontology ConsortiumP41HG002273 · NHGRI · JACKSON LABORATORY · PI BLAKE, JUDITH A · 2004 to 2011
$27.4M
GENE ONTOLOGY CONSORTIUMR01HG002273 · NHGRI · JACKSON LABORATORY · PI BLAKE, JUDITH A · 2001 to 2003
$5.8M
British Heart Foundation SP/07/007/23671NHGRI NIH HHS P41 HG002273NHGRI NIH HHS R01 HG002273NHGRI NIH HHS U41 HG002273
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Gene Ontology (GO) is widely recognized as the premier tool for the organization and functional annotation of molecular aspects of cellular systems. However, for many immunologists the use of GO is a very foreign concept. Indeed, as a controlled vocabulary, GO can almost be considered a new language, and it can be difficult to appreciate the use and value of this approach for understanding the immune system. This review reflects on the application of GO to the field of immunology and explains the process of GO annotation. Finally, this review hopes to inspire immunologists to invest time and energy in improving both the content of the GO and the quality of GO annotations associated with genes of immunological interest.

Indexed as

Allergy and ImmunologyDatabases, GeneticVocabulary, ControlledBiomedical ResearchB-LymphocytesComputational BiologyData Interpretation, StatisticalHumansImmunityLymphocyte Activation

Identifiers

PMID18798919
PMCPMC2561138

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.