Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30041430›Full record

ReviewHigh-throughput2018

Venomics: A Mini-Review.

David Wilson, Norelle L Daly

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in High-throughput, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

35 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Malacologia · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Toxinology in the proteomics era: a review on arachnid venom proteomics.The journal of venomous animals and toxins including tropical diseases · 2022
    Article
  20. Overview of protein posttranslational modifications in Arthropoda venoms.The journal of venomous animals and toxins including tropical diseases · 2022
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

David WilsonCentre for Biodiscovery and Molecular, Development of Therapeutics, AITHM, James Cook University, Cairns, QLD 4878, Australia. david.wilson4@jcu.edu.au.
Norelle L DalyCentre for Biodiscovery and Molecular, Development of Therapeutics, AITHM, James Cook University, Cairns, QLD 4878, Australia. norelle.daly@jcu.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-4697-6602

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Venomics is the integration of proteomic, genomic and transcriptomic approaches to study venoms. Advances in these approaches have enabled increasingly more comprehensive analyses of venoms to be carried out, overcoming to some extent the limitations imposed by the complexity of the venoms and the small quantities that are often available. Advances in bioinformatics and high-throughput functional assay screening approaches have also had a significant impact on venomics. A combination of all these techniques is critical for enhancing our knowledge on the complexity of venoms and their potential therapeutic and agricultural applications. Here we highlight recent advances in these fields and their impact on venom analyses.

Indexed as

bioinformaticsgenomicspharmacomicsproteomicstranscriptomicsvenomics

Identifiers

PMID30041430
PMCPMC6164461

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.