Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25381363›Full record

ArticleGenetics2014

Publication trends in model organism research.

Michael R Dietrich, Rachel A Ankeny, Patrick M Chen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genetics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing 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

25 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. The Marginal Value Theorem inbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  3. Modeling versatility as the hallmark of model organisms.History and philosophy of the life sciences · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Multisubstrate specificity shaped the complex evolution of the aminotransferase family across the tree of life.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Model Organisms Unbound.Journal of the history of biology · 2022
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Mobilizing molluscan models and genomes in biology.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2021
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors.

Michael R DietrichDepartment of Biological Sciences, Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire 03755 michael.dietrich@dartmouth.edu.
Rachel A AnkenySchool of History and Politics, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia 5005, Australia.
Patrick M ChenDepartment of Biological Sciences, Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire 03755.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In 1990, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) gave some organisms special status as designated model organisms. This article documents publication trends for these NIH-designated model organisms over the past 40 years. We find that being designated a model organism by the NIH does not guarantee an increasing publication trend. An analysis of model and nonmodel organisms included in GENETICS since 1960 does reveal a sharp decline in the number of publications using nonmodel organisms yet no decline in the overall species diversity. We suggest that organisms with successful publication records tend to share critical characteristics, such as being well developed as standardized, experimental systems and being used by well-organized communities with good networks of exchange and methods of communication.

Indexed as

Models, AnimalAnimalsBiodiversityNational Institutes of Health (U.S.)PlantsPublicationsResearchUnited States

Identifiers

PMID25381363
PMCPMC4224171

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.