Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26584768›Full record

ReviewTrends in cell biology2015

Theory in Biology: Figure 1 or Figure 7?

Rob Phillips

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Trends in cell biology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. UnlockingNAR genomics and bioinformatics · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Seeing with an extra sense.Current biology : CB · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. On the Role of Theory and Modeling in Neuroscience.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Mitotic spindle: lessons from theoretical modeling.Molecular biology of the cell · 2021
    Article
  13. Understanding the evolution of interspecies interactions in microbial communities.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2020
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

1 author.

Rob PhillipsDepartment of Applied Physics and Division of Biology and Biological Engineering, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, USA. Electronic address: phillips@pboc.caltech.edu.

Funding

NIH Director's Pioneer Award (RMI)DP1OD000217 · OD · CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI PHILLIPS, ROB · 2004 to 2008
$4.0M
Single-Molecule and Single-Cell Analysis of Transcription Factor-DNA ComplexesR01GM085286 · NIGMS · CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI PHILLIPS, ROB · 2009 to 2015
$2.8M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM085286NIH HHS DP1 OD000217
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The pace of modern science is staggering. The quantities of data now flowing from DNA sequencers, fluorescence and electron microscopes, mass spectrometers, and other mind-blowing instruments leave us faced with information overload. This explosion in data has brought on its heels a concomitant need for efforts at the kinds of synthesis and unification we see in theoretical physics. Often in cell biology, when theoretical modeling takes place, it is as a figure 7 reflection on experiments that have already been done, with data fitting providing a metric of success. Figure 1 theory, by way of contrast, is about living dangerously by turning our thinking into formal mathematical predictions and confronting that math with experiments that have not yet been done.

Indexed as

Cell BiologyModels, TheoreticalAnimalsGene Expression RegulationHumansProtein Structure, Tertiary

Identifiers

PMID26584768
PMCPMC4666001

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.