Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36699361›Full record

ArticleBioinformatics advances2022

The field of protein function prediction as viewed by different domain scientists.

Rashika Ramola, Iddo Friedberg, Predrag Radivojac

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioinformatics advances, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Advances in Protein Function Prediction from the Fifth CAFA Challenge.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Protein functional site annotation using local structure embeddings.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
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

3 authors.

Rashika RamolaKhoury College of Computer Sciences, Northeastern University, Boston, MA 02115, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4970-5242
Iddo FriedbergDepartment of Veterinary Microbiology and Preventive Medicine, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1789-8000
Predrag RadivojacKhoury College of Computer Sciences, Northeastern University, Boston, MA 02115, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6769-0793

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Motivation: Experimental biologists, biocurators, and computational biologists all play a role in characterizing a protein's function. The discovery of protein function in the laboratory by experimental scientists is the foundation of our knowledge about proteins. Experimental findings are compiled in knowledgebases by biocurators to provide standardized, readily accessible, and computationally amenable information. Computational biologists train their methods using these data to predict protein function and guide subsequent experiments. To understand the state of affairs in this ecosystem, centered here around protein function prediction, we surveyed scientists from these three constituent communities. Results: We show that the three communities have common but also idiosyncratic perspectives on the field. Most strikingly, experimentalists rarely use state-of-the-art prediction software, but when presented with predictions, report many to be surprising and useful. Ontologies appear to be highly valued by biocurators, less so by experimentalists and computational biologists, yet controlled vocabularies bridge the communities and simplify the prediction task. Additionally, many software tools are not readily accessible and the predictions presented to the users can be broad and uninformative. We conclude that to meet both the social and technical challenges in the field, a more productive and meaningful interaction between members of the core communities is necessary. Availability and implementation: Data cannot be shared for ethical/privacy reasons. Supplementary information: Supplementary data are available at

Identifiers

PMID36699361
PMCPMC9710704

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.