ArticleAnnual review of biomedical data science2019
Scientific Discovery Games for Biomedical Research.
Article in Annual review of biomedical data science, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Foundations of a Compositional Systems Biology.ArXiv · 2024Article
- Critical Assessment of Protein Engineering (CAPE): A Student Challenge on the Cloud.ACS synthetic biology · 2024Article
- A Perspective on Crowdsourcing and Human-in-the-Loop Workflows in Precision Health.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Crowdsourced RNA design discovers diverse, reversible, efficient, self-contained molecular switches.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022Article
- A Brave New World: Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality in Systems Biology.Frontiers in bioinformatics · 2022Article
- Crowdsourcing and open innovation in drug discovery: recent contributions and future directions.Drug discovery today · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Over the past decade, scientific discovery games (SDGs) have emerged as a viable approach for biomedical research, engaging hundreds of thousands of volunteer players and resulting in numerous scientific publications. After describing the origins of this novel research approach, we review the scientific output of SDGs across molecular modeling, sequence alignment, neuroscience, pathology, cellular biology, genomics, and human cognition. We find compelling results and technical innovations arising in problem-oriented games such as Foldit and Eterna and in data-oriented games such as EyeWire and Project Discovery. We discuss emergent properties of player communities shared across different projects, including the diversity of communities and the extraordinary contributions of some volunteers, such as paper writing. Finally, we highlight connections to artificial intelligence, biological cloud laboratories, new game genres, science education, and open science that may drive the next generation of SDGs.
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.