ReviewFEBS letters2017
Challenges for visualizing three-dimensional data in genomic browsers.
Review in FEBS letters, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Geometric Diagrams of Genomes: constructing a visual grammar for 3D genomics.Genome biology · 2025Article
- Molecular biology and design research : A new paradigm and transdisciplinary approach to communicating science.EMBO reports · 2025Article
- ARGV: 3D genome structure exploration using augmented reality.BMC bioinformatics · 2024Article
- Productive visualization of high-throughput sequencing data using the SeqCode open portable platform.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Tasks, Techniques, and Tools for Genomic Data Visualization.Computer graphics forum : journal of the European Association for Computer Graphics · 2019Article
- Challenges and guidelines toward 4D nucleome data and model standards.Nature genetics · 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Genomic interactions reveal the spatial organization of genomes and genomic domains, which is known to play key roles in cell function. Physical proximity can be represented as two-dimensional heat maps or matrices. From these, three-dimensional (3D) conformations of chromatin can be computed revealing coherent structures that highlight the importance of nonsequential relationships across genomic features. Mainstream genomic browsers have been classically developed to display compact, stacked tracks based on a linear, sequential, per-chromosome coordinate system. Genome-wide comparative analysis demands new approaches to data access and new layouts for analysis. The legibility can be compromised when displaying track-aligned second dimension matrices, which require greater screen space. Moreover, 3D representations of genomes defy vertical alignment in track-based genome browsers. Furthermore, investigation at previously unattainable levels of detail is revealing multiscale, multistate, time-dependent complexity. This article outlines how these challenges are currently handled in mainstream browsers as well as how novel techniques in visualization are being explored to address them. A set of requirements for coherent visualization of novel spatial genomic data is defined and the resulting potential for whole genome visualization is described.
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.