ArticleMolecular biology of the cell2018
Sharing and reusing cell image data.
Article in Molecular biology of the cell, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Making the most of bioimaging data through interdisciplinary interactions.Journal of cell science · 2024Review
- Multisite assessment of reproducibility in high-content cell migration imaging data.Molecular systems biology · 2023Article
- Sharing biological data: why, when, and how.FEBS letters · 2021Article
- Data science in cell imaging.Journal of cell science · 2021Review
- Community standards for open cell migration data.GigaScience · 2020Article
- Conserved Eukaryotic Kinase CK2 Chaperone Intrinsically Disordered Protein Interactions.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2020Article
- The Integrated Resource for Reproducibility in Macromolecular Crystallography: Experiences of the first four years.Structural dynamics (Melville, N.Y.) · 2019Article
- Key challenges facing data-driven multicellular systems biology.GigaScience · 2019Review
- Quantitative Spatial Analysis of Metabolic Heterogeneity AcrossFrontiers in oncology · 2019Article
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
The rapid growth in content and complexity of cell image data creates an opportunity for synergy between experimental and computational scientists. Sharing microscopy data enables computational scientists to develop algorithms and tools for data analysis, integration, and mining. These tools can be applied by experimentalists to promote hypothesis-generation and discovery. We are now at the dawn of this revolution: infrastructure is being developed for data standardization, deposition, sharing, and analysis; some journals and funding agencies mandate data deposition; data journals publish high-content microscopy data sets; quantification becomes standard in scientific publications; new analytic tools are being developed and dispatched to the community; and huge data sets are being generated by individual labs and philanthropic initiatives. In this Perspective, I reflect on sharing and reusing cell image data and the opportunities that will come along with it.
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.