ArticlePeerJ2018
Plant data visualisation using network graphs.
Article in PeerJ, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe amount of plant data such as taxonomical classification, morphological characteristics, ecological attributes and geological distribution in textual and image forms has increased rapidly due to emerging research and technologies. Therefore, it is crucial for experts as well as the public to discern meaningful relationships from this vast amount of data using appropriate methods. The data are often presented in lengthy texts and tables, which make gaining new insights difficult. The study proposes a visual-based representation to display data to users in a meaningful way. This method emphasises the relationships between different data sets.
methodThis study involves four main steps which translate text-based results from Extensible Markup Language (XML) serialisation format into graphs. The four steps include: (1) conversion of ontological dataset as graph model data; (2) query from graph model data; (3) transformation of text-based results in XML serialisation format into a graphical form; and (4) display of results to the user via a graphical user interface (GUI). Ontological data for plants and samples of trees and shrubs were used as the dataset to demonstrate how plant-based data could be integrated into the proposed data visualisation.
resultsA visualisation system named plant visualisation system was developed. This system provides a GUI that enables users to perform the query process, as well as a graphical viewer to display the results of the query in the form of a network graph. The efficiency of the developed visualisation system was measured by performing two types of user evaluations: a usability heuristics evaluation, and a query and visualisation evaluation. DISCUSSION: The relationships between the data were visualised, enabling the users to easily infer the knowledge and correlations between data. The results from the user evaluation show that the proposed visualisation system is suitable for both expert and novice users, with or without computer skills. This technique demonstrates the practicability of using a computer assisted-tool by providing cognitive analysis for understanding relationships between data. Therefore, the results benefit not only botanists, but also novice users, especially those that are interested to know more about plants.
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.