Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32089117›Full record

ArticlePhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2020

Unifying the essential concepts of biological networks: biological insights and philosophical foundations.

Daniel Kostić, Claus C Hilgetag, Marc Tittgemeyer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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

3 authors.

Daniel KostićUniversity Bordeaux Montaigne, Department of Philosophy and EA 4574 'Sciences, Philosophie, Humanités' (SPH) at University of Bordeaux, Allée Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, Bâtiment B2, 33615 Pessac cedex, France.
Claus C HilgetagInstitute of Computational Neuroscience, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg 20246, Germany.
Marc TittgemeyerMax-Planck-Institut for Metabolism Research, Translational Neurocircuitry, Cologne, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Over the last decades, network-based approaches have become highly popular in diverse fields of biology, including neuroscience, ecology, molecular biology and genetics. While these approaches continue to grow very rapidly, some of their conceptual and methodological aspects still require a programmatic foundation. This challenge particularly concerns the question of whether a generalized account of explanatory, organizational and descriptive levels of networks can be applied universally across biological sciences. To this end, this highly interdisciplinary theme issue focuses on the definition, motivation and application of key concepts in biological network science, such as explanatory power of distinctively network explanations, network levels and network hierarchies. This article is part of the theme issue 'Unifying the essential concepts of biological networks: biological insights and philosophical foundations'.

Indexed as

Genetic TechniquesEcologyModels, BiologicalMolecular BiologyNeurosciencesbiological complexitybiological networksexploratory modelsnetwork hierarchiestopological explanationtopological modularity

Identifiers

PMID32089117
PMCPMC7061958

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.