Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24776761›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2014

Nanoinformatics: emerging databases and available tools.

Suresh Panneerselvam, Sangdun Choi

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Tumor Targeting by αACS nano · 2020
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Toward a systematic exploration of nano-bio interactions.Toxicology and applied pharmacology · 2017
    Review
  13. Review
  14. The eNanoMapper database for nanomaterial safety information.Beilstein journal of nanotechnology · 2015
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Modeling Population Exposures to Silver Nanoparticles Present in Consumer Products.Journal of nanoparticle research : an interdisciplinary forum for nanoscale science and technology · 2014
    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

2 authors.

Suresh PanneerselvamDepartment of Molecular Science and Technology, Ajou University, Suwon 443-749, Korea. sureshcbt@gmail.com.
Sangdun ChoiDepartment of Molecular Science and Technology, Ajou University, Suwon 443-749, Korea. sangdunchoi@ajou.ac.kr.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nanotechnology has arisen as a key player in the field of nanomedicine. Although the use of engineered nanoparticles is rapidly increasing, safety assessment is also important for the beneficial use of new nanomaterials. Considering that the experimental assessment of new nanomaterials is costly and laborious, in silico approaches hold promise. Several major challenges in nanotechnology indicate a need for nanoinformatics. New database initiatives such as ISA-TAB-Nano, caNanoLab, and Nanomaterial Registry will help in data sharing and developing data standards, and, as the amount of nanomaterials data grows, will provide a way to develop methods and tools specific to the nanolevel. In this review, we describe emerging databases and tools that should aid in the progress of nanotechnology research.

Indexed as

Databases, FactualNanostructuresComputer-Aided DesignComputer SimulationData MiningHumansModels, MolecularNanomedicineNanotechnologyQuantitative Structure-Activity Relationship

Identifiers

PMID24776761
PMCPMC4057665

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.