Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23140568›Full record

ArticleBMC systems biology2012

VANTED v2: a framework for systems biology applications.

Hendrik Rohn, Astrid Junker, Anja Hartmann, Eva Grafahrend-Belau, Hendrik Treutler, Matthias Klapperstück, Tobias Czauderna, Christian Klukas, Falk Schreiber

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC systems biology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 93 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
93citing 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

93 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. From Gene to Whole Cell: Modeling, Visualization, and Analysis.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2025
    Article
  6. Transcriptome analysis ofFrontiers in plant science · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

33 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

9 authors.

Hendrik RohnLeibniz Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research (IPK), Corrensstr. 3, 06466 Gatersleben, Germany. rohn@ipk-gatersleben.de
Astrid Junker
Anja Hartmann
Eva Grafahrend-Belau
Hendrik Treutler
Matthias Klapperstück
Tobias Czauderna
Christian Klukas
Falk Schreiber

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundExperimental datasets are becoming larger and increasingly complex, spanning different data domains, thereby expanding the requirements for respective tool support for their analysis. Networks provide a basis for the integration, analysis and visualization of multi-omics experimental datasets.

resultsHere we present VANTED (version 2), a framework for systems biology applications, which comprises a comprehensive set of seven main tasks. These range from network reconstruction, data visualization, integration of various data types, network simulation to data exploration combined with a manifold support of systems biology standards for visualization and data exchange. The offered set of functionalities is instantiated by combining several tasks in order to enable users to view and explore a comprehensive dataset from different perspectives. We describe the system as well as an exemplary workflow.

conclusionsVANTED is a stand-alone framework which supports scientists during the data analysis and interpretation phase. It is available as a Java open source tool from http://www.vanted.org.

Indexed as

SoftwareArabidopsisComputer GraphicsSystems Biology

Identifiers

PMID23140568
PMCPMC3610154

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.