ArticlePLoS computational biology2013
Ten simple rules for cultivating open science and collaborative R&D.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cardiology researchers' practices and perceived barriers to open science: an international survey.Open heart · 2024Article
- Ten simple rules to cultivate belonging in collaborative data science research teams.PLoS computational biology · 2022Article
- Ten simple rules for researchers who want to develop web apps.PLoS computational biology · 2022Article
- Ten simple rules to cultivate transdisciplinary collaboration in data science.PLoS computational biology · 2021Article
- A brief guide to the science and art of writing manuscripts in biomedicine.Journal of translational medicine · 2020Review
- Available Software for Meta-analyses of Genome-wide Expression Studies.Current genomics · 2019Review
- Ten simple rules for carrying out and writing meta-analyses.PLoS computational biology · 2019Article
- Open laboratory notebooks: good for science, good for society, good for scientists.F1000Research · 2019Article
- Ten simple rules on how to create open access and reproducible molecular simulations of biological systems.PLoS computational biology · 2019Article
- Ten simple rules for biologists learning to program.PLoS computational biology · 2018Article
- Ten Simple Rules to Enable Multi-site Collaborations through Data Sharing.PLoS computational biology · 2017Article
- Achievements and challenges in structural bioinformatics and computational biophysics.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2015Article
- Understanding Fear of Opportunism in Global Prize-Based Science Contests: Evidence for Gender and Age Differences.PloS one · 2015Article
- What drives academic data sharing?PloS one · 2015Article
- Grant application review: the case of transparency.PLoS biology · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.
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.