ArticleScientific reports2018
Gene annotation bias impedes biomedical research.
Article in Scientific reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 113 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
113 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The characteristics of early-stage research into human genes are substantially different from subsequent research.PLoS biology · 2022Pooled it
- Problems With GO Enrichment as an Endpoint for Ecological Omics Interpretation.Molecular ecology · 2026Article
- Finetuning Foundation Models for Temporal Clinical Transcriptomics Data.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Network Pharmacology-Based Exploration of Complementary Molecular Mechanisms of Heat-Clearing (Scutellariae Radix, Coptidis Rhizoma) and Blood-Tonifying Herbs (Angelicae Sinensis Radix, Paeoniae Radix Alba) in Cold Hypersensitivity in Hands and Feet.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The multi-omics fallacy in microbiome science.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- Context-Aware Multilevel Classification of Semantic Relations in Drug-Adverse Drug Reaction (ADR) Networks-Predicting Drug-Induced Liver Injury (DILI) as a Case Study.Chemical research in toxicology · 2026Article
- The molecular ICU: a primer on omics, informatics and the future of precision critical care.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Review
- Evolutionary and functional constraints structure human gene research visibility.BMC genomics · 2026Article
- End-to-end deep attention-based multitask pipeline for predicting uncertainty-quantified peptide properties from mass spectrometry data.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Machine learning can distinguish orphans that have resulted from sequence divergence beyond recognition.Bioinformatics advances · 2026Article
- A practical guide to functional enrichment analysis.Frontiers in bioinformatics · 2026Article
- Analyzing human gut microbiome data from global populations: challenges and resources.Trends in microbiology · 2025Review
- Differences in GenBank and RefSeq annotations may affect genomics data interpretation formSphere · 2025Article
- Computational function prediction of bacteria and phage proteins.Microbiology and molecular biology reviews : MMBR · 2025Review
- Overcoming research bias: The untapped potential of biomedically important but understudied proteins.iScience · 2025Article
- Methodological opportunities in genomic data analysis to advance health equity.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2025Review
- Peptide abundance correlations in metaproteomics enhance taxonomic and functional analysis of the human gut microbiome.NPJ biofilms and microbiomes · 2025Article
- Qarles: a web server for the quick characterization of large sets of genes.NAR genomics and bioinformatics · 2025Article
- A workflow for human health hazard evaluation using transcriptomic data and Key Characteristics-based gene sets.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2025Article
- A longitudinal analysis of function annotations of the human proteome reveals consistently high biases.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2025Article
53 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We found tremendous inequality across gene and protein annotation resources. We observed that this bias leads biomedical researchers to focus on richly annotated genes instead of those with the strongest molecular data. We advocate that researchers reduce these biases by pursuing data-driven hypotheses.
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.