ArticlePLoS computational biology2014
Ten simple rules for effective computational research.
Abstract readEditorial
In one paragraph
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.
0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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
33 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ten simple rules to complete successfully a computational MSc thesis project.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
- Reviewability and supportability: New complementary principles to empower research software practices.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2024Review
- Ten simple rules for training scientists to make better software.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- Ten simple rules for managing laboratory information.PLoS computational biology · 2023Article
- Ten simple rules for providing bioinformatics support within a hospital.BioData mining · 2023Article
- Meeting in the Middle: Towards Successful Multidisciplinary Bioimage Analysis Collaboration.Frontiers in bioinformatics · 2022Article
- Ten simple rules for large-scale data processing.PLoS computational biology · 2022Article
- Article
- Ten simple rules for quick and dirty scientific programming.PLoS computational biology · 2021Article
- Ten simple rules for navigating the computational aspect of an interdisciplinary PhD.PLoS computational biology · 2021Article
- Review
- Low availability of code in ecology: A call for urgent action.PLoS biology · 2020Article
- Twelve quick tips for designing sound dynamical models for bioprocesses.PLoS computational biology · 2019Article
- Shift in the paradigm towards next-generation microbiology.FEMS microbiology letters · 2019Review
- Ten simple rules for carrying out and writing meta-analyses.PLoS computational biology · 2019Article
- Comparing time series transcriptome data between plants using a network module finding algorithm.Plant methods · 2019Article
- Software engineering principles to improve quality and performance of R software.PeerJ. Computer science · 2019Article
- Ten simple rules for documenting scientific software.PLoS computational biology · 2018Article
- Ten quick tips for getting the most scientific value out of numerical data.PLoS computational biology · 2018Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
James M OsborneComputational Biology Group, Department of Computer Science, University of Oxford, Wolfson Building, Oxford, United Kingdom; Computational Science Laboratory, Microsoft Research, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Miguel O BernabeuCoMPLEX, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, University College London, Physics Building, London, United Kingdom; Centre for Computational Science, Department of Chemistry, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Maria BrunaComputational Biology Group, Department of Computer Science, University of Oxford, Wolfson Building, Oxford, United Kingdom; Computational Science Laboratory, Microsoft Research, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Ben CalderheadCoMPLEX, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, University College London, Physics Building, London, United Kingdom.
Jonathan CooperComputational Biology Group, Department of Computer Science, University of Oxford, Wolfson Building, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Neil DalchauComputational Science Laboratory, Microsoft Research, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Sara-Jane DunnComputational Science Laboratory, Microsoft Research, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Alexander G FletcherWolfson Centre for Mathematical Biology, Mathematical Institute, University of Oxford, Andrew Wiles Building, Radcliffe Observatory Quarter, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Robin FreemanComputational Science Laboratory, Microsoft Research, Cambridge, United Kingdom; CoMPLEX, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, University College London, Physics Building, London, United Kingdom.
Derek GroenCentre for Computational Science, Department of Chemistry, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Bernhard KnappDepartment of Statistics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Greg J McInernyComputational Biology Group, Department of Computer Science, University of Oxford, Wolfson Building, Oxford, United Kingdom; Computational Science Laboratory, Microsoft Research, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Gary R MiramsComputational Biology Group, Department of Computer Science, University of Oxford, Wolfson Building, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Joe Pitt-FrancisComputational Biology Group, Department of Computer Science, University of Oxford, Wolfson Building, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Biswa SenguptaThe Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging, Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
David W WrightCoMPLEX, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, University College London, Physics Building, London, United Kingdom; Centre for Computational Science, Department of Chemistry, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Christian A YatesWolfson Centre for Mathematical Biology, Mathematical Institute, University of Oxford, Andrew Wiles Building, Radcliffe Observatory Quarter, Oxford, United Kingdom.
David J GavaghanComputational Biology Group, Department of Computer Science, University of Oxford, Wolfson Building, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Stephen EmmottComputational Science Laboratory, Microsoft Research, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Charlotte DeaneDepartment of Statistics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Funding
National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research NC/K001337/1Wellcome Trust 101222
Abstract
PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.
Indexed as
Computational BiologyComputersComputer SimulationModels, StatisticalSoftware
Identifiers
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.