ArticlePLoS biology2023
The dawn of relaxed phylogenetics.
Article in PLoS biology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Phylogenomic analysis of thePersoonia · 2024Article
- PLOS Biology at 20: Ain't no mountain high enough.PLoS biology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Tracing the history of evolution across time is a primary goal of evolutionary biology. The 2006 publication of a landmark study on relaxed phylogenetics in PLOS Biology enabled biologists to shed light on evolution's tempo and shaped the future of evolutionary studies.
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.