ArticleNPJ systems biology and applications2022
Severe testing with high-dimensional omics data for enhancing biomedical scientific discovery.
Article in NPJ systems biology and applications, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence in plant salt stress research: from predictive models to multi-omics integration.Journal of experimental botany · 2026Review
- Ultraprocessed food research and scientific discourse.Nature food · 2026Review
- Research Hypothesis: A Brief History, Central Role in Scientific Inquiry, and Characteristics.Addiction & health · 2025Article
- High NTRK2 protein expression levels may be associated with poorer prognosis of breast cancer patients.The Journal of international medical research · 2024Article
- [Validity of the hypothesis in the Omics Era].Revista de la Facultad de Ciencias Medicas (Cordoba, Argentina) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
High-throughput omics experiments provide a wealth of data for exploring biomedical questions and for advancing translational research. However, despite this great potential, results that enter the clinical practice are scarce even twenty years after the completion of the human genome project. For this reason in this paper, we revisit problems with scientific discovery commonly summarized under the term reproducibility crisis. We will argue that the major problem that hampers progress in translational research is threefold. First, in order to establish biological foundations of disorders or general complex phenotypes, one needs to embrace emergence. Second, there seems to be confusion about the underlying hypotheses tested by omics studies. Third, most contemporary omics studies are designed to perform what can be seen as incremental corroborations of a hypothesis. In order to improve upon these shortcomings, we define a severe testing framework (STF) that can be applied to a large number of omics studies for enhancing scientific discovery in the biomedical sciences. Briefly, STF provides systematic means to trim wild-grown omics studies in a constructive way.
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.