Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25798198›Full record

ArticleJournal of cheminformatics2015

Machines first, humans second: on the importance of algorithmic interpretation of open chemistry data.

Alex M Clark, Antony J Williams, Sean Ekins

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cheminformatics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. 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.

Alex M ClarkMolecular Materials Informatics, 1900 St. Jacques #302, Montreal, H3J 2S1, QC Canada.
Antony J WilliamsRoyal Society of Chemistry, 904 Tamaras Circle, Wake Forest, NC 27587 USA.
Sean EkinsCollaborations in Chemistry, 5616 Hilltop Needmore Road, Fuquay-Varina, NC 27526 USA ; Collaborative Drug Discovery, 1633 Bayshore Highway, Suite 342, Burlingame, CA 94010 USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The current rise in the use of open lab notebook techniques means that there are an increasing number of scientists who make chemical information freely and openly available to the entire community as a series of micropublications that are released shortly after the conclusion of each experiment. We propose that this trend be accompanied by a thorough examination of data sharing priorities. We argue that the most significant immediate benefactor of open data is in fact chemical algorithms, which are capable of absorbing vast quantities of data, and using it to present concise insights to working chemists, on a scale that could not be achieved by traditional publication methods. Making this goal practically achievable will require a paradigm shift in the way individual scientists translate their data into digital form, since most contemporary methods of data entry are designed for presentation to humans rather than consumption by machine learning algorithms. We discuss some of the complex issues involved in fixing current methods, as well as some of the immediate benefits that can be gained when open data is published correctly using unambiguous machine readable formats. Graphical AbstractLab notebook entries must target both visualisation by scientists and use by machine learning algorithms.

Indexed as

CheminformaticsFile formatsMachine learningOpen lab notebooksPublic data

Identifiers

PMID25798198
PMCPMC4369291

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.