Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24647311›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

Open window: when easily identifiable genomes and traits are in the public domain.

Misha Angrist

Abstract readComment
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 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. Challenges of web-based personal genomic data sharing.Life sciences, society and policy · 2015
    Article
  3. Translational genomics.Applied & translational genomics · 2014
    Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Misha AngristInstitute for Genome Sciences and Policy, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America; Program in Science and Society, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America; Sanford School of Public Policy, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America.

Funding

The Management and Organization Core will be administered by the Center for GenomP50HG003391 · NHGRI · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI COOK-DEEGAN, ROBERT MULLAN · 2004 to 2014
$9.9M
NHGRI NIH HHS 5P50-HG003391-07NHGRI NIH HHS P50 HG003391
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

"One can't be of an enquiring and experimental nature, and still be very sensible."--Charles Fort. As the costs of personal genetic testing "self-quantification" fall, publicly accessible databases housing people's genotypic and phenotypic information are gradually increasing in number and scope. The latest entrant is openSNP, which allows participants to upload their personal genetic/genomic and self-reported phenotypic data. I believe the emergence of such open repositories of human biological data is a natural reflection of inquisitive and digitally literate people's desires to make genomic and phenotypic information more easily available to a community beyond the research establishment. Such unfettered databases hold the promise of contributing mightily to science, science education and medicine. That said, in an age of increasingly widespread governmental and corporate surveillance, we would do well to be mindful that genomic DNA is uniquely identifying. Participants in open biological databases are engaged in a real-time experiment whose outcome is unknown.

Indexed as

CrowdsourcingGenomicsPolymorphism, Single NucleotideSoftwareHumans

Identifiers

PMID24647311
PMCPMC3960179

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.