Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20679334›Full record

ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2010

ISA software suite: supporting standards-compliant experimental annotation and enabling curation at the community level.

Philippe Rocca-Serra, Marco Brandizi, Eamonn Maguire, Nataliya Sklyar, Chris Taylor, Kimberly Begley, Dawn Field, Stephen Harris, Winston Hide, Oliver Hofmann and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 156 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
156citing 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

156 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. The FAIRSCAPE AI-readiness Framework for Biomedical Research.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. An approach to making life sciences FAIR-FAIR-DS as a tool for Aspergillus fumigatus.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

96 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

14 authors.

Philippe Rocca-SerraThe European Bioinformatics Institute, Wellcome Trust Genome Campus, Cambridge, UK.
Marco Brandizi
Eamonn Maguire
Nataliya Sklyar
Chris Taylor
Kimberly Begley
Dawn Field
Stephen Harris
Winston Hide
Oliver Hofmann
Steffen Neumann
Peter Sterk
Weida Tong
Susanna-Assunta Sansone

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/E025080/1Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/G000638/1Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/I000771/1Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/I000917/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

unlabelledThe first open source software suite for experimentalists and curators that (i) assists in the annotation and local management of experimental metadata from high-throughput studies employing one or a combination of omics and other technologies; (ii) empowers users to uptake community-defined checklists and ontologies; and (iii) facilitates submission to international public repositories. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: Software, documentation, case studies and implementations at http://www.isa-tools.org.

Indexed as

SoftwareChecklistDocumentation

Identifiers

PMID20679334
PMCPMC2935443

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.