ArticlePloS one2023
A web-based platform for the annotation and analysis of NAR-published databases.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Biological databases are essential resources for life science research, but finding and selecting the most relevant and up-to-date databases can be challenging due to the large number and diversity of available databases. The Nucleic Acids Research (NAR) journal publishes annual database issues that provide a comprehensive list of databases in the molecular biology domain. However, the information provided by NAR is limited and sometimes does not reflect the current status and quality of the databases. In this article, we present a web-based platform for the annotation and analysis of NAR-published databases. The platform allows users to manually curate and enrich the NAR entries with additional information such as availability, downloadability, source code links, cross-references, and duplicates. Statistics and visualizations on various aspects of the database landscape, such as recency, status, category, and curation history are also provided. Currently, it contains a total of 2,246 database entries of which 2,025 are unique with the majority updated within the last five years. Around 75% of all databases are still available and more than half provide a download option. Cross references to Database Commons are available for 1,889 entries. The platform is freely available online at https://nardbstatus.kalis-amts.de and aims to help researchers in database selection and decision-making. It also provides insights into the current state and challenges of a subset of all databases in the life sciences.
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.