Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30325351›Full record

ArticleScientific data2018

Analysis of impact metrics for the Protein Data Bank.

Christopher Markosian, Luigi Di Costanzo, Monica Sekharan, Chenghua Shao, Stephen K Burley, Christine Zardecki

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific data, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. RankMHC: Learning to Rank Class-I Peptide-MHC Structural Models.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Graph representation learning for structural proteomics.Emerging topics in life sciences · 2021
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. RCSB Protein Data Bank: Enabling biomedical research and drug discovery.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2020
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
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

6 authors.

Christopher MarkosianDepartment of Molecular Biology and Biochemistry, School of Arts and Sciences, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Piscataway, NJ USA.
Luigi Di CostanzoRCSB Protein Data Bank, Institute for Quantitative Biomedicine, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Piscataway, NJ USA.
Monica SekharanRCSB Protein Data Bank, Institute for Quantitative Biomedicine, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Piscataway, NJ USA.
Chenghua ShaoRCSB Protein Data Bank, Institute for Quantitative Biomedicine, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Piscataway, NJ USA.
Stephen K BurleyRCSB Protein Data Bank, Institute for Quantitative Biomedicine, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Piscataway, NJ USA.
Christine ZardeckiRCSB Protein Data Bank, Institute for Quantitative Biomedicine, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Piscataway, NJ USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Since 1971, the Protein Data Bank (PDB) archive has served as the single, global repository for open access to atomic-level data for biological macromolecules. The archive currently holds >140,000 structures (>1 billion atoms). These structures are the molecules of life found in all organisms. Knowing the 3D structure of a biological macromolecule is essential for understanding the molecule's function, providing insights in health and disease, food and energy production, and other topics of concern to prosperity and sustainability. PDB data are freely and publicly available, without restrictions on usage. Through bibliometric and usage studies, we sought to determine the impact of the PDB across disciplines and demographics. Our analysis shows that even though research areas such as molecular biology and biochemistry account for the most usage, other fields are increasingly using PDB resources. PDB usage is seen across 150 disciplines in applied sciences, humanities, and social sciences. Data are also re-used and integrated with >400 resources. Our study identifies trends in PDB usage and documents its utility across research disciplines.

Identifiers

PMID30325351
PMCPMC6190746

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.