Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22434842›Full record

ArticleDatabase : the journal of biological databases and curation2012

Tracking and coordinating an international curation effort for the CCDS Project.

Rachel A Harte, Catherine M Farrell, Jane E Loveland, Marie-Marthe Suner, Laurens Wilming, Bronwen Aken, Daniel Barrell, Adam Frankish, Craig Wallin, Steve Searle and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Database : the journal of biological databases and curation, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing 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

39 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. How Genomic and Structural Context Could Shape JAK-STAT Variant Pathogenicity.Twin research and human genetics : the official journal of the International Society for Twin Studies · 2026
    Article
  2. Efficient gene editing through an intronic selection marker in cells.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2022
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Assessing the functional relevance of splice isoforms.NAR genomics and bioinformatics · 2021
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Target-Cell-Directed Bioengineering Approaches for Gene Therapy of Hemophilia A.Molecular therapy. Methods & clinical development · 2018
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. The UniProtKB guide to the human proteome.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2016
    Article
  17. CoReCG: a comprehensive database of genes associated with colon-rectal cancer.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2016
    Article
  18. The Ensembl gene annotation system.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2016
    Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

13 authors.

Rachel A HarteCenter for Biomolecular Science and Engineering, University of California Santa Cruz (UCSC), Santa Cruz, CA 95064, USA.
Catherine M Farrell
Jane E Loveland
Marie-Marthe Suner
Laurens Wilming
Bronwen Aken
Daniel Barrell
Adam Frankish
Craig Wallin
Steve Searle
Mark Diekhans
Jennifer Harrow
Kim D Pruitt

Funding

National Biomedical Information ServicesZIHLM200888 · NLM · NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE · PI PALTOO, DINA · 2009 to 2025
$5200.7M
Integrated human genome annotation: generation of a reference gene setU54HG004555 · NHGRI · SANGER INSTITUTE · PI HUBBARD, TIMOTHY JOHN · 2007 to 2012
$11.2M
Intramural NIH HHSNHGRI NIH HHS 5U54HG00455-04NHGRI NIH HHS 5U54 HG004555NHGRI NIH HHS U54 HG004555Wellcome Trust 095908Wellcome Trust WT062023Wellcome Trust WT077198
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Consensus Coding Sequence (CCDS) collaboration involves curators at multiple centers with a goal of producing a conservative set of high quality, protein-coding region annotations for the human and mouse reference genome assemblies. The CCDS data set reflects a 'gold standard' definition of best supported protein annotations, and corresponding genes, which pass a standard series of quality assurance checks and are supported by manual curation. This data set supports use of genome annotation information by human and mouse researchers for effective experimental design, analysis and interpretation. The CCDS project consists of analysis of automated whole-genome annotation builds to identify identical CDS annotations, quality assurance testing and manual curation support. Identical CDS annotations are tracked with a CCDS identifier (ID) and any future change to the annotated CDS structure must be agreed upon by the collaborating members. CCDS curation guidelines were developed to address some aspects of curation in order to improve initial annotation consistency and to reduce time spent in discussing proposed annotation updates. Here, we present the current status of the CCDS database and details on our procedures to track and coordinate our efforts. We also present the relevant background and reasoning behind the curation standards that we have developed for CCDS database treatment of transcripts that are nonsense-mediated decay (NMD) candidates, for transcripts containing upstream open reading frames, for identifying the most likely translation start codons and for the annotation of readthrough transcripts. Examples are provided to illustrate the application of these guidelines. DATABASE URL: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/CCDS/CcdsBrowse.cgi.

Indexed as

Consensus SequenceDatabase Management SystemsDatabases, GeneticAnimalsGenomicsHumansMiceMolecular Sequence Annotation

Identifiers

PMID22434842
PMCPMC3308164

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.