Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34200663›Full record

ArticleProteomes2021

Mining Proteome Research Reports: A Bird's Eye View.

Jagajjit Sahu

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proteomes, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 52% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Trends and New Developments inAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022
    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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jagajjit SahuNational Centre for Cell Science (NCCS), NCCS Complex, Pune University Campus, Ganeshkhind Road, Pune 411007, Maharashtra, India.ORCID 0000-0001-7468-5696
National Centre for Cell Science · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The complexity of data has burgeoned to such an extent that scientists of every realm are encountering the incessant challenge of data management. Modern-day analytical approaches with the help of free source tools and programming languages have facilitated access to the context of the various domains as well as specific works reported. Here, with this article, an attempt has been made to provide a systematic analysis of all the available reports at PubMed on Proteome using text mining. The work is comprised of scientometrics as well as information extraction to provide the publication trends as well as frequent keywords, bioconcepts and most importantly gene-gene co-occurrence network. Out of 33,028 PMIDs collected initially, the segregation of 24,350 articles under 28 Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) was analyzed and plotted. Keyword link network and density visualizations were provided for the top 1000 frequent Mesh keywords. PubTator was used, and 322,026 bioconcepts were able to extracted under 10 classes (such as Gene, Disease, CellLine, etc.). Co-occurrence networks were constructed for PMID-bioconcept as well as bioconcept-bioconcept associations. Further, for creation of subnetwork with respect to gene-gene co-occurrence, a total of 11,100 unique genes participated with mTOR and AKT showing the highest (64) number of connections. The gene p53 was the most popular one in the network in accordance with both the degree and weighted degree centrality, which were 425 and 1414, respectively. The present piece of study is an amalgam of bibliometrics and scientific data mining methods looking deeper into the whole scale analysis of available literature on proteome.

Indexed as

bio-conceptsgene–gene networkNLPproteomescientometricstext mining

Identifiers

PMID34200663
PMCPMC8293458
OpenAlexW3167437029

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.