ArticleDatabase : the journal of biological databases and curation2012
Assessment of community-submitted ontology annotations from a novel database-journal partnership.
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 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Characterization and automated classification of sentences in the biomedical literature: a case study for biocuration of gene expression and protein kinase activity.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2025Article
- The Arabidopsis Information Resource in 2024.Genetics · 2024Article
- Text mining meets community curation: a newly designed curation platform to improve author experience and participation at WormBase.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2020Article
- Expanding the horizons of microRNA bioinformatics.RNA (New York, N.Y.) · 2018Article
- AgBioData consortium recommendations for sustainable genomics and genetics databases for agriculture.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2018Article
- Model organism databases: essential resources that need the support of both funders and users.BMC biology · 2016Article
- Sustainable funding for biocuration: The Arabidopsis Information Resource (TAIR) as a case study of a subscription-based funding model.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2016Article
- The Arabidopsis information resource: Making and mining the "gold standard" annotated reference plant genome.Genesis (New York, N.Y. : 2000) · 2015Article
- Integrating pathways of Parkinson's disease in a molecular interaction map.Molecular neurobiology · 2014Review
- Hybrid curation of gene-mutation relations combining automated extraction and crowdsourcing.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2014Article
- Immediate dissemination of student discoveries to a model organism database enhances classroom-based research experiences.CBE life sciences education · 2014Article
- Microbial virus genome annotation-mustering the troops to fight the sequence onslaught.Virology · 2012Review
- Building an efficient curation workflow for the Arabidopsis literature corpus.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
As the scientific literature grows, leading to an increasing volume of published experimental data, so does the need to access and analyze this data using computational tools. The most commonly used method to convert published experimental data on gene function into controlled vocabulary annotations relies on a professional curator, employed by a model organism database or a more general resource such as UniProt, to read published articles and compose annotation statements based on the articles' contents. A more cost-effective and scalable approach capable of capturing gene function data across the whole range of biological research organisms in computable form is urgently needed. We have analyzed a set of ontology annotations generated through collaborations between the Arabidopsis Information Resource and several plant science journals. Analysis of the submissions entered using the online submission tool shows that most community annotations were well supported and the ontology terms chosen were at an appropriate level of specificity. Of the 503 individual annotations that were submitted, 97% were approved and community submissions captured 72% of all possible annotations. This new method for capturing experimental results in a computable form provides a cost-effective way to greatly increase the available body of annotations without sacrificing annotation quality. Database URL: www.arabidopsis.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.