ArticleScientific data2020
A detailed open access model of the PubMed literature.
Article in Scientific data, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- PubMed knowledge graph 2.0: Connecting papers, patents, and clinical trials in biomedical science.Scientific data · 2025Article
- The landscape of biomedical research.Patterns (New York, N.Y.) · 2024Article
- Mapping the Bibliometrics Landscape of AI in Medicine: Methodological Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Introducing the open biomedical map of science.Frontiers in research metrics and analytics · 2023Article
- Making Biomedical Sciences publications more accessible for machines.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2022Article
- The landscape of photoaging: From bench to bedside in a bibliometric analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- When Cyclodextrins Met Data Science: Unveiling Their Pharmaceutical Applications through Network Science and Text-Mining.Pharmaceutics · 2021Article
- Assessment of transparency indicators across the biomedical literature: How open is open?PLoS biology · 2021Article
- A detailed open access model of the PubMed literature.Scientific data · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Portfolio analysis is a fundamental practice of organizational leadership and is a necessary precursor of strategic planning. Successful application requires a highly detailed model of research options. We have constructed a model, the first of its kind, that accurately characterizes these options for the biomedical literature. The model comprises over 18 million PubMed documents from 1996-2019. Document relatedness was measured using a hybrid citation analysis + text similarity approach. The resulting 606.6 million document-to-document links were used to create 28,743 document clusters and an associated visual map. Clusters are characterized using metadata (e.g., phrases, MeSH) and over 20 indicators (e.g., funding, patent activity). The map and cluster-level data are embedded in Tableau to provide an interactive model enabling in-depth exploration of a research portfolio. Two example usage cases are provided, one to identify specific research opportunities related to coronavirus, and the second to identify research strengths of a large cohort of African American and Native American researchers at the University of Michigan Medical School.
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.