Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38361661›Full record

ReviewStructural dynamics (Melville, N.Y.)2024

Raw diffraction data and reproducibility.

Loes M J Kroon-Batenburg, Matthew P Lightfoot, Natalie T Johnson, John R Helliwell

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Structural dynamics (Melville, N.Y.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Powder diffraction data beyond the pattern: a practical review.Journal of applied crystallography · 2025
    Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

4 authors.

Loes M J Kroon-BatenburgCrystal and Structural Chemistry, Bijvoet Center for Biomolecular Research, Utrecht University, Universiteitsweg 99, 3584 CG Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5321-1392
Matthew P LightfootCambridge Crystallographic Data Centre, 12 Union Road, Cambridge CB2 1EZ, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8789-6959
Natalie T JohnsonCambridge Crystallographic Data Centre, 12 Union Road, Cambridge CB2 1EZ, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5405-1450
John R HelliwellDepartment of Chemistry, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0520-7540

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent years, there has been a major expansion in digital storage capability for hosting raw diffraction datasets. Naturally, the question has now arisen as to the benefits and costs for the preservation of such raw, i.e., experimental diffraction datasets. We describe the consultations made of the global structural chemistry, i.e., chemical crystallography community from the points of view of the International Union of Crystallography (IUCr) Committee on Data, of which JRH was the Chair until very recently, and the IUCrData Raw Data Letters initiative, for which LKB is the Main Editor. The monitoring by the CCDC of CSD depositions which cite the digital object identifiers of raw diffraction datasets provides interesting statistics by probe (x-ray, neutron, or electron) and by home lab vs central facility. Clearly, a better understanding of the reproducibility of current analysis procedures is at hand. Policies for publication requiring raw data have been updated in IUCr Journals for macromolecular crystallography, namely, that raw data should be made available for a new crystal structure or a new method as well as the wwPDB deposition. For chemical crystallography, such a step requiring raw data archiving has not yet been recommended by the IUCr Commission on Structural Chemistry.

Identifiers

PMID38361661
PMCPMC10869167

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.