Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22005096›Full record

ArticleBMC research notes2011

A case study for efficient management of high throughput primary lab data.

Christian Colmsee, Steffen Flemming, Matthias Klapperstück, Matthias Lange, Uwe Scholz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC research notes, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

5 authors.

Christian ColmseeLeibniz Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research (IPK), Corrensstr, 3, 06466 Gatersleben, Germany. colmsee@ipk-gatersleben.de.
Steffen Flemming
Matthias Klapperstück
Matthias Lange
Uwe Scholz

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn modern life science research it is very important to have an efficient management of high throughput primary lab data. To realise such an efficient management, four main aspects have to be handled: (I) long term storage, (II) security, (III) upload and (IV) retrieval.

findingsIn this paper we define central requirements for a primary lab data management and discuss aspects of best practices to realise these requirements. As a proof of concept, we introduce a pipeline that has been implemented in order to manage primary lab data at the Leibniz Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research (IPK). It comprises: (I) a data storage implementation including a Hierarchical Storage Management system, a relational Oracle Database Management System and a BFiler package to store primary lab data and their meta information, (II) the Virtual Private Database (VPD) implementation for the realisation of data security and the LIMS Light application to (III) upload and (IV) retrieve stored primary lab data.

conclusionsWith the LIMS Light system we have developed a primary data management system which provides an efficient storage system with a Hierarchical Storage Management System and an Oracle relational database. With our VPD Access Control Method we can guarantee the security of the stored primary data. Furthermore the system provides high performance upload and download and efficient retrieval of data.

Identifiers

PMID22005096
PMCPMC3217054

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.