ArticlePloS one2013
Discovering implicit entity relation with the gene-citation-gene network.
Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Decoding the dark genome reveals its organisation into modular disease networks.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Analysis of the evolution of COVID-19 disease understanding through temporal knowledge graphs.Frontiers in research metrics and analytics · 2023Article
- Analyzing knowledge entities about COVID-19 using entitymetrics.Scientometrics · 2021Article
- Understanding Drug Repurposing From the Perspective of Biomedical Entities and Their Evolution: Bibliographic Research Using Aspirin.JMIR medical informatics · 2020Article
- A context-based ABC model for literature-based discovery.PloS one · 2019Article
- Identifying Liver Cancer and Its Relations with Diseases, Drugs, and Genes: A Literature-Based Approach.PloS one · 2016Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this paper, we apply the entitymetrics model to our constructed Gene-Citation-Gene (GCG) network. Based on the premise there is a hidden, but plausible, relationship between an entity in one article and an entity in its citing article, we constructed a GCG network of gene pairs implicitly connected through citation. We compare the performance of this GCG network to a gene-gene (GG) network constructed over the same corpus but which uses gene pairs explicitly connected through traditional co-occurrence. Using 331,411 MEDLINE abstracts collected from 18,323 seed articles and their references, we identify 25 gene pairs. A comparison of these pairs with interactions found in BioGRID reveal that 96% of the gene pairs in the GCG network have known interactions. We measure network performance using degree, weighted degree, closeness, betweenness centrality and PageRank. Combining all measures, we find the GCG network has more gene pairs, but a lower matching rate than the GG network. However, combining top ranked genes in both networks produces a matching rate of 35.53%. By visualizing both the GG and GCG networks, we find that cancer is the most dominant disease associated with the genes in both networks. Overall, the study indicates that the GCG network can be useful for detecting gene interaction in an implicit manner.
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.