ArticleTrends in immunology2016
The Scientist as Illustrator.
Article in Trends in immunology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- The SmARTR pipeline: A modular workflow for the cinematic rendering of 3D scientific imaging data.iScience · 2024Article
- Seeing the unseen: Comparison study of representation approaches for biochemical processes in education.PloS one · 2023Review
- Structural Landscape of the Transition from an ssDNA Dumbbell Plus Its Complementary Hairpin to a dsDNA Microcircle Via a Kissing Loop Intermediate.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Plant science decadal vision 2020-2030: Reimagining the potential of plants for a healthy and sustainable future.Plant direct · 2020Article
- Molecular Illustration in Research and Education: Past, Present, and Future.Journal of molecular biology · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Proficiency in art and illustration was once considered an essential skill for biologists, because text alone often could not suffice to describe observations of biological systems. With modern imaging technology, it is no longer necessary to illustrate what we can see by eye. However, in molecular and cellular biology, our understanding of biological processes is dependent on our ability to synthesize diverse data to generate a hypothesis. Creating visual models of these hypotheses is important for generating new ideas and for communicating to our peers and to the public. Here, I discuss the benefits of creating visual models in molecular and cellular biology and consider steps to enable researchers to become more effective visual communicators.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.