ArticlePLoS biology2019
The NIH Open Citation Collection: A public access, broad coverage resource.
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 54 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
54 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
- Accelerating the development of bioelectronic medicine: overview and impact of the NIH Stimulating Peripheral Activity to Relieve Conditions (SPARC) initiative.Bioelectronic medicine · 2026Review
- 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
- CRISPR/Cas9-Based Genome Editing: Understanding Differences in DNA Repair Pathways, Profiles, and Outcomes.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Article
- Evaluation of research productivity among academic neuro-ophthalmologists using the relative citation ratio.Frontiers in ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Productivity of National Cancer Institute K Awardees and Their Transition to Independent Funding.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 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
- Meta-Research: Positive genetic interactions have greater scientific impact but are under-represented in the literature.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Global distribution of research efforts, disease burden, and impact of US public funding withdrawal.Nature medicine · 2025Article
- PubMed knowledge graph 2.0: Connecting papers, patents, and clinical trials in biomedical science.Scientific data · 2025Article
- uCite: The union of nine large-scale public PubMed citation datasets with reliability filtering.Data in brief · 2025Article
- IMPC impact on preclinical mouse models.Mammalian genome : official journal of the International Mammalian Genome Society · 2025Article
- Bibliometrics and National Institutes of Health Funding: Associated Factors in Academic Rhinology.Indian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India · 2025Article
- Climbing the Research Ladder: A 25-year Analysis of K-to-R Grant Conversion among Plastic Surgeons.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2024Article
- What the Heck Is a Journal Impact Factor Anyway? Dissemination Measures for Educators.Journal of graduate medical education · 2024Article
- Illuminating the druggable genome: Pathways to progress.Drug discovery today · 2024Review
- Disruption of trauma research: an analysis of the top cited versus disruptive trauma research publications.Trauma surgery & acute care open · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Citation data have remained hidden behind proprietary, restrictive licensing agreements, which raises barriers to entry for analysts wishing to use the data, increases the expense of performing large-scale analyses, and reduces the robustness and reproducibility of the conclusions. For the past several years, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Office of Portfolio Analysis (OPA) has been aggregating and enhancing citation data that can be shared publicly. Here, we describe the NIH Open Citation Collection (NIH-OCC), a public access database for biomedical research that is made freely available to the community. This dataset, which has been carefully generated from unrestricted data sources such as MedLine, PubMed Central (PMC), and CrossRef, now underlies the citation statistics delivered in the NIH iCite analytic platform. We have also included data from a machine learning pipeline that identifies, extracts, resolves, and disambiguates references from full-text articles available on the internet. Open citation links are available to the public in a major update of iCite (https://icite.od.nih.gov).
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.