Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22681406›Full record

ArticleImmunology2012

The immune epitope database: a historical retrospective of the first decade.

Nima Salimi, Ward Fleri, Bjoern Peters, Alessandro Sette

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Immunology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. T Cell Epitope Peptide Therapy for Allergic Diseases.Current allergy and asthma reports · 2016
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Immunoregulatory T cell epitope peptides: the new frontier in allergy therapy.Clinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2015
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. A review of quantitative modeling of B cell responses to antigenic challenge.Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics · 2014
    Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Nima SalimiLa Jolla Institute for Allergy & Immunology, La Jolla, CA 92037, USA. nsalimi@liai.org
Ward Fleri
Bjoern Peters
Alessandro Sette
La Jolla Institute for Immunology · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As the amount of biomedical information available in the literature continues to increase, databases that aggregate this information continue to grow in importance and scope. The population of databases can occur either through fully automated text mining approaches or through manual curation by human subject experts. We here report our experiences in populating the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases sponsored Immune Epitope Database and Analysis Resource (IEDB, http://iedb.org), which was created in 2003, and as of 2012 captures the epitope information from approximately 99% of all papers published to date that describe immune epitopes (with the exception of cancer and HIV data). This was achieved using a hybrid model based on automated document categorization and extensive human expert involvement. This task required automated scanning of over 22 million PubMed abstracts followed by classification and curation of over 13 000 references, including over 7000 infectious disease-related manuscripts, over 1000 allergy-related manuscripts, roughly 4000 related to autoimmunity, and 1000 transplant/alloantigen-related manuscripts. The IEDB curation involves an unprecedented level of detail, capturing for each paper the actual experiments performed for each different epitope structure. Key to enabling this process was the extensive use of ontologies to ensure rigorous and consistent data representation as well as interoperability with other bioinformatics resources, including the Protein Data Bank, Chemical Entities of Biological Interest, and the NIAID Bioinformatics Resource Centers. A growing fraction of the IEDB data derives from direct submissions by research groups engaged in epitope discovery, and is being facilitated by the implementation of novel data submission tools. The present explosion of information contained in biological databases demands effective query and display capabilities to optimize the user experience. Accordingly, the development of original ways to query the database, on the basis of ontologically driven hierarchical trees, and display of epitope data in aggregate in a biologically intuitive yet rigorous fashion is now at the forefront of the IEDB efforts. We also highlight advances made in the realm of epitope analysis and predictive tools available in the IEDB.

Indexed as

BibliometricsDatabases, GeneticEpitopesHumansInternetTime FactorsEpitopes

Identifiers

PMID22681406
PMCPMC3461392
OpenAlexW2014927132

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.