ArticlePLoS biology2019
Predicting translational progress in biomedical research.
Article in PLoS biology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
42 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The characteristics of early-stage research into human genes are substantially different from subsequent research.PLoS biology · 2022Pooled it
- Collaboration between The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network and the American Association of Endodontists: Impact on the endodontic literature.Journal of the American Dental Association (1939) · 2026Article
- Comparing the outputs of intramural and extramural grants funded by National Institutes of Health.eLife · 2026Article
- Authorship and citation trends in dementia research: A path to equitable career development for scientists.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2026Article
- Genomic stewardship in Alzheimer's disease: a decade of insights from the NIAGADS platform.NPJ dementia · 2026Article
- A thirty-year trend of increasing clinical orientation at the National Institutes of Health.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Prediction of transformative breakthroughs in biomedical research.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Most researchers would receive more recognition if assessed by article-level metrics than by journal-level metrics.PLoS biology · 2025Article
- Global distribution of research efforts, disease burden, and impact of US public funding withdrawal.Nature medicine · 2025Article
- IMPC impact on preclinical mouse models.Mammalian genome : official journal of the International Mammalian Genome Society · 2025Article
- Mitochondria in cancer: a comprehensive review, bibliometric analysis, and future perspectives.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Academic influencers: Clinical and Translational Science scholars and trainees at the intersection of influential scholarship and public attention.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2025Article
- From theory to practice - assessing translation of physical fitness research in the emergency department through machine learning and natural language processing.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2025Article
- What predicts citation counts and translational impact in headache research? A machine learning analysis.Cephalalgia : an international journal of headache · 2024Article
- Illuminating the druggable genome: Pathways to progress.Drug discovery today · 2024Review
- Analysis of cognitive framework and biomedical translation of tissue engineering in otolaryngology.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Predicting substantive biomedical citations without full text.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023Article
- Impact of National Institutes of Health and Food and Drug Administration Tobacco Research Funding: A Bibliometrics Analyses.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2023Article
- Guidelines to Analyze Preclinical Studies Using Perinatal Derivatives.Methods and protocols · 2023Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Fundamental scientific advances can take decades to translate into improvements in human health. Shortening this interval would increase the rate at which scientific discoveries lead to successful treatment of human disease. One way to accomplish this would be to identify which advances in knowledge are most likely to translate into clinical research. Toward that end, we built a machine learning system that detects whether a paper is likely to be cited by a future clinical trial or guideline. Despite the noisiness of citation dynamics, as little as 2 years of postpublication data yield accurate predictions about a paper's eventual citation by a clinical article (accuracy = 84%, F1 score = 0.56; compared to 19% accuracy by chance). We found that distinct knowledge flow trajectories are linked to papers that either succeed or fail to influence clinical research. Translational progress in biomedicine can therefore be assessed and predicted in real time based on information conveyed by the scientific community's early reaction to a paper.
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.