ArticleScientific reports2017
CrossCheck: an open-source web tool for high-throughput screen data analysis.
Article in Scientific reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- GWAS shows links between EDARADD and LRFN5 and performance in professional athletes.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Clinical, social, molecular, and genetic predictors of cognitive resilience in long-living adults without dementia.Frontiers in dementia · 2025Article
- BRAF and AXL oncogenes drive RIPK3 expression loss in cancer.PLoS biology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Modern high-throughput screening methods allow researchers to generate large datasets that potentially contain important biological information. However, oftentimes, picking relevant hits from such screens and generating testable hypotheses requires training in bioinformatics and the skills to efficiently perform database mining. There are currently no tools available to general public that allow users to cross-reference their screen datasets with published screen datasets. To this end, we developed CrossCheck, an online platform for high-throughput screen data analysis. CrossCheck is a centralized database that allows effortless comparison of the user-entered list of gene symbols with 16,231 published datasets. These datasets include published data from genome-wide RNAi and CRISPR screens, interactome proteomics and phosphoproteomics screens, cancer mutation databases, low-throughput studies of major cell signaling mediators, such as kinases, E3 ubiquitin ligases and phosphatases, and gene ontological information. Moreover, CrossCheck includes a novel database of predicted protein kinase substrates, which was developed using proteome-wide consensus motif searches. CrossCheck dramatically simplifies high-throughput screen data analysis and enables researchers to dig deep into the published literature and streamline data-driven hypothesis generation. CrossCheck is freely accessible as a web-based application at http://proteinguru.com/crosscheck.
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.