ArticleGigaScience2018
Monitoring changes in the Gene Ontology and their impact on genomic data analysis.
Article in GigaScience, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Problems With GO Enrichment as an Endpoint for Ecological Omics Interpretation.Molecular ecology · 2026Article
- A change language for ontologies and knowledge graphs.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2025Article
- A review on Gene Ontology evaluations.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2025Review
- Article
- The Arabidopsis Information Resource in 2024.Genetics · 2024Article
- Circulating Blood Prognostic Biomarker Signatures for Hemorrhagic Cerebral Cavernous Malformations (CCMs).International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Monitoring changes in the Gene Ontology and their impact on genomic data analysis.GigaScience · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: The Gene Ontology (GO) is one of the most widely used resources in molecular and cellular biology, largely through the use of "enrichment analysis." To facilitate informed use of GO, we present GOtrack (https://gotrack.msl.ubc.ca), which provides access to historical records and trends in the GO and GO annotations. Findings: GOtrack gives users access to gene- and term-level information on annotations for nine model organisms as well as an interactive tool that measures the stability of enrichment results over time for user-provided "hit lists" of genes. To document the effects of GO evolution on enrichment, we analyzed more than 2,500 published hit lists of human genes (most older than 9 years ); 53% of hit lists were considered to yield significantly stable enrichment results. Conclusions: Because stability is far from assured for any individual hit list, GOtrack can lead to more informed and cautious application of GO to genomics research.
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.