ArticleJournal of biomedical discovery and collaboration2009
Supporting cognition in systems biology analysis: findings on users' processes and design implications.
Article in Journal of biomedical discovery and collaboration, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ferret: a sentence-based literature scanning system.BMC bioinformatics · 2015Article
- Research Infrastructure for Collaborative Team Science: Challenges in Technology-Supported Workflows in and Across Laboratories, Institutions, and Geographies.Seminars in nephrology · 2015Review
- Scientists' sense making when hypothesizing about disease mechanisms from expression data and their needs for visualization support.BMC bioinformatics · 2014Article
- The FaceBase Consortium: a comprehensive program to facilitate craniofacial research.Developmental biology · 2011Article
- A cognitive task analysis of a visual analytic workflow: Exploring molecular interaction networks in systems biology.Journal of biomedical discovery and collaboration · 2011Article
- EpiphaNet: An Interactive Tool to Support Biomedical Discoveries.Journal of biomedical discovery and collaboration · 2010Article
- Metscape: a Cytoscape plug-in for visualizing and interpreting metabolomic data in the context of human metabolic networks.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2010Article
- Visualizing biological data-now and in the future.Nature methods · 2010Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCurrent usability studies of bioinformatics tools suggest that tools for exploratory analysis support some tasks related to finding relationships of interest but not the deep causal insights necessary for formulating plausible and credible hypotheses. To better understand design requirements for gaining these causal insights in systems biology analyses a longitudinal field study of 15 biomedical researchers was conducted. Researchers interacted with the same protein-protein interaction tools to discover possible disease mechanisms for further experimentation.
resultsFindings reveal patterns in scientists' exploratory and explanatory analysis and reveal that tools positively supported a number of well-structured query and analysis tasks. But for several of scientists' more complex, higher order ways of knowing and reasoning the tools did not offer adequate support. Results show that for a better fit with scientists' cognition for exploratory analysis systems biology tools need to better match scientists' processes for validating, for making a transition from classification to model-based reasoning, and for engaging in causal mental modelling.
conclusionAs the next great frontier in bioinformatics usability, tool designs for exploratory systems biology analysis need to move beyond the successes already achieved in supporting formulaic query and analysis tasks and now reduce current mismatches with several of scientists' higher order analytical practices. The implications of results for tool designs are discussed.
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.