ArticleDatabase : the journal of biological databases and curation2011
The curation paradigm and application tool used for manual curation of the scientific literature at the Comparative Toxicogenomics Database.
Article in Database : the journal of biological databases and curation, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 31 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
31 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Integrating AI-powered text mining from PubTator into the manual curation workflow at the Comparative Toxicogenomics Database.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2025Article
- Transforming environmental health datasets from the comparative toxicogenomics database into chord diagrams to visualize molecular mechanisms.Frontiers in toxicology · 2024Article
- CTD tetramers: a new online tool that computationally links curated chemicals, genes, phenotypes, and diseases to inform molecular mechanisms for environmental health.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2023Article
- Comparative Toxicogenomics Database (CTD): update 2023.Nucleic acids research · 2023Article
- Comparative Toxicogenomics Database (CTD): update 2021.Nucleic acids research · 2021Article
- Construction of Mode of Action for Cadmium-Induced Renal Tubular Dysfunction Based on a Toxicity Pathway-Oriented Approach.Frontiers in genetics · 2021Article
- CTD Anatomy: analyzing chemical-induced phenotypes and exposures from an anatomical perspective, with implications for environmental health studies.Current research in toxicology · 2021Article
- Leveraging the Comparative Toxicogenomics Database to Fill in Knowledge Gaps for Environmental Health: A Test Case for Air Pollution-induced Cardiovascular Disease.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2020Article
- Public data sources to support systems toxicology applications.Current opinion in toxicology · 2019Article
- The Comparative Toxicogenomics Database: update 2019.Nucleic acids research · 2019Article
- Identifying High-Priority Proteins Across the Human Diseasome Using Semantic Similarity.Journal of proteome research · 2018Article
- Chemical-Induced Phenotypes at CTD Help Inform the Predisease State and Construct Adverse Outcome Pathways.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2018Article
- Accessing an Expanded Exposure Science Module at the Comparative Toxicogenomics Database.Environmental health perspectives · 2018Article
- The Comparative Toxicogenomics Database: update 2017.Nucleic acids research · 2017Article
- Advancing Exposure Science through Chemical Data Curation and Integration in the Comparative Toxicogenomics Database.Environmental health perspectives · 2016Article
- Generating Gene Ontology-Disease Inferences to Explore Mechanisms of Human Disease at the Comparative Toxicogenomics Database.PloS one · 2016Article
- A crowdsourcing workflow for extracting chemical-induced disease relations from free text.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2016Article
- BioCreative V CDR task corpus: a resource for chemical disease relation extraction.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2016Article
- The Comparative Toxicogenomics Database's 10th year anniversary: update 2015.Nucleic acids research · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedRosenstein, Michael C [added]
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The Comparative Toxicogenomics Database (CTD) is a public resource that promotes understanding about the effects of environmental chemicals on human health. CTD biocurators read the scientific literature and convert free-text information into a structured format using official nomenclature, integrating third party controlled vocabularies for chemicals, genes, diseases and organisms, and a novel controlled vocabulary for molecular interactions. Manual curation produces a robust, richly annotated dataset of highly accurate and detailed information. Currently, CTD describes over 349,000 molecular interactions between 6800 chemicals, 20,900 genes (for 330 organisms) and 4300 diseases that have been manually curated from over 25,400 peer-reviewed articles. This manually curated data are further integrated with other third party data (e.g. Gene Ontology, KEGG and Reactome annotations) to generate a wealth of toxicogenomic relationships. Here, we describe our approach to manual curation that uses a powerful and efficient paradigm involving mnemonic codes. This strategy allows biocurators to quickly capture detailed information from articles by generating simple statements using codes to represent the relationships between data types. The paradigm is versatile, expandable, and able to accommodate new data challenges that arise. We have incorporated this strategy into a web-based curation tool to further increase efficiency and productivity, implement quality control in real-time and accommodate biocurators working remotely. Database URL: http://ctd.mdibl.org.
Indexed as
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.