ArticleDiscoveries (Craiova, Romania)2015
Initiative for standardization of the format of the next-generation sequencing (NGS) results.
Article in Discoveries (Craiova, Romania), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genetic sex determination assays in 53 mammalian species: Literature analysis and guidelines for reporting standardization.Ecology and evolution · 2018Article
- High Throughput Sequencing for Detection of Foodborne Pathogens.Frontiers in microbiology · 2017Review
- Transcription factor HIF1A: downstream targets, associated pathways, polymorphic hypoxia response element (HRE) sites, and initiative for standardization of reporting in scientific literature.Tumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The number of published reports using next-generation sequencing (NGS) technology in cancer research is increasing. These technologies generate large amounts of data that need to be appropriately presented and available to other researchers for further use. Our goal was to create a comprehensive database with single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with different types of cancer to integrate them to our bioinformatics tools. We reviewed more than 200 scientific papers and extracted relevant information on mutations detected by NGS technology. The current version of the database contains more than 100.000 mutations in more than 70 types of cancer. However, our review of NGS studies revealed great variation in presentation of NGS data in scientific literature with almost no effort for standardization of the data format. NGS results are published in a variety of forms which hinders the gathering of information. Therefore we suggested a uniform format for presenting the NGS data. This will allow faster database development, easier access and data sharing between the laboratories. The database will be a useful tool to many researchers in the field of cancer research and can be a base for a range of studies such as genome-wide association studies, microRNA target binding, and development of cancer biomarkers research.
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.