Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33165574›Full record

ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2021

EpiGraphDB: a database and data mining platform for health data science.

Yi Liu, Benjamin Elsworth, Pau Erola, Valeriia Haberland, Gibran Hemani, Matt Lyon, Jie Zheng, Oliver Lloyd, Marina Vabistsevits, Tom R Gaunt

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 35 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. APOE*4 risk-modifying genes and drug targets in Alzheimer's disease through cell-type-specific genomic analyses.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. The rapid growth in Mendelian randomization studies.European journal of epidemiology · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Managing the Exponential Growth of Mendelian Randomization Studies.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Pleiotropic Bias and Study Design Considerations in Genetic Association Studies.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Yi LiuMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2051-440X
Benjamin ElsworthMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Pau ErolaMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Valeriia HaberlandCancer Genetics, Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3874-0683
Gibran HemaniMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Matt LyonMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Jie ZhengMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Oliver LloydMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Marina VabistsevitsMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Tom R GauntMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.

Funding

British Heart Foundation AA/18/7/34219Cancer Research UK 19169Cancer Research UK 29019Cancer Research UK C18281/A19169Medical Research Council MC_UU_00011/4Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 208806/Z/17/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

motivationThe wealth of data resources on human phenotypes, risk factors, molecular traits and therapeutic interventions presents new opportunities for population health sciences. These opportunities are paralleled by a growing need for data integration, curation and mining to increase research efficiency, reduce mis-inference and ensure reproducible research.

resultsWe developed EpiGraphDB (https://epigraphdb.org/), a graph database containing an array of different biomedical and epidemiological relationships and an analytical platform to support their use in human population health data science. In addition, we present three case studies that illustrate the value of this platform. The first uses EpiGraphDB to evaluate potential pleiotropic relationships, addressing mis-inference in systematic causal analysis. In the second case study, we illustrate how protein-protein interaction data offer opportunities to identify new drug targets. The final case study integrates causal inference using Mendelian randomization with relationships mined from the biomedical literature to 'triangulate' evidence from different sources. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: The EpiGraphDB platform is openly available at https://epigraphdb.org. Code for replicating case study results is available at https://github.com/MRCIEU/epigraphdb as Jupyter notebooks using the API, and https://mrcieu.github.io/epigraphdb-r using the R package. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

Indexed as

Data ScienceSoftwareDatabases, FactualData MiningHumansPhenotype

Identifiers

PMID33165574
PMCPMC8189674

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.