Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24589879›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2014

Efficient sample tracking with OpenLabFramework.

Markus List, Steffen Schmidt, Jakub Trojnar, Jochen Thomas, Mads Thomassen, Torben A Kruse, Qihua Tan, Jan Baumbach, Jan Mollenhauer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
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.

Markus List1] Lundbeckfonden Center of Excellence in Nanomedicine NanoCAN, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, DK [2] Institute of Molecular Medicin (IMM), University of Southern Denmark, Odense, DK [3] Clinical Institute (CI), University of Southern Denmark, Odense, DK.
Steffen Schmidt1] Lundbeckfonden Center of Excellence in Nanomedicine NanoCAN, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, DK [2] Institute of Molecular Medicin (IMM), University of Southern Denmark, Odense, DK.
Jakub Trojnar1] Lundbeckfonden Center of Excellence in Nanomedicine NanoCAN, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, DK [2] Institute of Molecular Medicin (IMM), University of Southern Denmark, Odense, DK [3] Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology (BMB), University of Southern Denmark, Odense, DK.
Jochen Thomasio-consultants GmbH & Co. KG, Heidelberg, DE.
Mads Thomassen1] Lundbeckfonden Center of Excellence in Nanomedicine NanoCAN, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, DK [2] Clinical Institute (CI), University of Southern Denmark, Odense, DK.
Torben A Kruse1] Lundbeckfonden Center of Excellence in Nanomedicine NanoCAN, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, DK [2] Clinical Institute (CI), University of Southern Denmark, Odense, DK.
Qihua Tan1] Clinical Institute (CI), University of Southern Denmark, Odense, DK [2] Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Biodemography, Institute of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, DK.
Jan BaumbachDepartment of Mathematics and Computer Science (IMADA), University of Southern Denmark, Odense, DK.
Jan Mollenhauer1] Lundbeckfonden Center of Excellence in Nanomedicine NanoCAN, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, DK [2] Institute of Molecular Medicin (IMM), University of Southern Denmark, Odense, DK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The advance of new technologies in biomedical research has led to a dramatic growth in experimental throughput. Projects therefore steadily grow in size and involve a larger number of researchers. Spreadsheets traditionally used are thus no longer suitable for keeping track of the vast amounts of samples created and need to be replaced with state-of-the-art laboratory information management systems. Such systems have been developed in large numbers, but they are often limited to specific research domains and types of data. One domain so far neglected is the management of libraries of vector clones and genetically engineered cell lines. OpenLabFramework is a newly developed web-application for sample tracking, particularly laid out to fill this gap, but with an open architecture allowing it to be extended for other biological materials and functional data. Its sample tracking mechanism is fully customizable and aids productivity further through support for mobile devices and barcoded labels.

Indexed as

Clinical Laboratory Information SystemsDatabase Management SystemsInformation Storage and RetrievalHumansInternetUser-Computer InterfaceWeb Browser

Identifiers

PMID24589879
PMCPMC3940979

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.