ReviewThe Journal of physiology2017
Metabolic systems biology: a brief primer.
Review in The Journal of physiology, 2017. 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.
- A Practical Guide to Integrating Multimodal Machine Learning and Metabolic Modeling.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2022Article
- Design and Implementation of a Tool to Assess Students' Understanding of Metabolic Pathways Dynamics and Regulation.CBE life sciences education · 2021Article
- Diabetic kidney diseases revisited: A new perspective for a new era.Molecular metabolism · 2019Review
- Systems Biology Approach to Bioremediation of Nitroaromatics: Constraint-Based Analysis of 2,4,6-Trinitrotoluene Biotransformation by Escherichia coli.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2017Article
- Overview of The Journal of Physiology Special Issue on the 'Biomedical basis of elite performance'.The Journal of physiology · 2017Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the early to mid-20th century, reductionism as a concept in biology was challenged by key thinkers, including Ludwig von Bertalanffy. He proposed that living organisms were specific examples of complex systems and, as such, they should display characteristics including hierarchical organisation and emergent behaviour. Yet the true study of complete biological systems (for example, metabolism) was not possible until technological advances that occurred 60 years later. Technology now exists that permits the measurement of complete levels of the biological hierarchy, for example the genome and transcriptome. The complexity and scale of these data require computational models for their interpretation. The combination of these - systems thinking, high-dimensional data and computation - defines systems biology, typically accompanied by some notion of iterative model refinement. Only sequencing-based technologies, however, offer full coverage. Other 'omics' platforms trade coverage for sensitivity, although the densely connected nature of biological networks suggests that full coverage may not be necessary. Systems biology models are often characterised as either 'bottom-up' (mechanistic) or 'top-down' (statistical). This distinction can mislead, as all models rely on data and all are, to some degree, 'middle-out'. Systems biology has matured as a discipline, and its methods are commonplace in many laboratories. However, many challenges remain, especially those related to large-scale data integration.
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.