Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30650089›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Rethomics: An R framework to analyse high-throughput behavioural data.

Quentin Geissmann, Luis Garcia Rodriguez, Esteban J Beckwith, Giorgio F Gilestro

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 84 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
84citing 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

84 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. iScience · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. A functional clock in only two dorsal clock neurons is sufficient to restore the basal circadian activity pattern ofProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

24 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

4 authors.

Quentin GeissmannDepartment of Life Sciences, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-6546-4306
Luis Garcia RodriguezInstitute for Neuro- and Behavioral Biology, Westfälische Wilhelms University, 48149 Münster, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-1659-2306
Esteban J BeckwithDepartment of Life Sciences, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-3373-1833
Giorgio F GilestroDepartment of Life Sciences, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-7512-8541

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/J014575/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The recent development of automatised methods to score various behaviours on a large number of animals provides biologists with an unprecedented set of tools to decipher these complex phenotypes. Analysing such data comes with several challenges that are largely shared across acquisition platform and paradigms. Here, we present rethomics, a set of R packages that unifies the analysis of behavioural datasets in an efficient and flexible manner. rethomics offers a computational solution to storing, manipulating and visualising large amounts of behavioural data. We propose it as a tool to bridge the gap between behavioural biology and data sciences, thus connecting computational and behavioural scientists. rethomics comes with a extensive documentation as well as a set of both practical and theoretical tutorials (available at https://rethomics.github.io).

Indexed as

SoftwareAnimalsBehavior, AnimalCircadian RhythmComputational BiologyDatabases, FactualDrosophilaFemaleMaleMetadata

Identifiers

PMID30650089
PMCPMC6334930

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.