ArticlePLoS biology2021
A field guide to cultivating computational biology.
Article in PLoS biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bridging annotated microscopy imaging data and analysis method development for scientific discovery.Patterns (New York, N.Y.) · 2026Review
- Review
- Balancing ethical data sharing and open science for reproducible research in biomedical data science.Cell reports. Medicine · 2025Article
- Virtual cells for predictive immunotherapy.Nature biotechnology · 2025Article
- The crucial role of bioimage analysts in scientific research and publication.Journal of cell science · 2024Article
- Ten simple rules for training scientists to make better software.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- Review
- Using AI in bioimage analysis to elevate the rate of scientific discovery as a community.Nature methods · 2023Article
- Article
- Identification of unique transcriptomic signatures and key genes through RNA sequencing and integrated WGCNA and PPI network analysis in HIV infected lung cancer.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Ten simple rules for running a summer research program.PLoS computational biology · 2022Article
- The new era of quantitative cell imaging-challenges and opportunities.Molecular cell · 2022Review
- Using ChatGPT as a tool for training nonprogrammers to generate genomic sequence analysis code.Biochemistry and molecular biology education : a bimonthly publication of the International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular BiologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 14 institutions in 6 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Evolving in sync with the computation revolution over the past 30 years, computational biology has emerged as a mature scientific field. While the field has made major contributions toward improving scientific knowledge and human health, individual computational biology practitioners at various institutions often languish in career development. As optimistic biologists passionate about the future of our field, we propose solutions for both eager and reluctant individual scientists, institutions, publishers, funding agencies, and educators to fully embrace computational biology. We believe that in order to pave the way for the next generation of discoveries, we need to improve recognition for computational biologists and better align pathways of career success with pathways of scientific progress. With 10 outlined steps, we call on all adjacent fields to move away from the traditional individual, single-discipline investigator research model and embrace multidisciplinary, data-driven, team science.
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.