Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38662583›Full record

ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2024

BTR: a bioinformatics tool recommendation system.

Ryan Green, Xufeng Qu, Jinze Liu, Tingting Yu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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.

Ryan GreenDepartment of Computer Science, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati 45219, United States.
Xufeng QuDepartment of Biostatistics, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond 23284, United States.
Jinze LiuDepartment of Biostatistics, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond 23284, United States.
Tingting YuSchool of Computing, University of Connecticut, Storrs 06269, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-9461-4251

Funding

University of Cincinnati Startup Grant CCF-2152340
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

motivationThe rapid expansion of Bioinformatics research has led to a proliferation of computational tools for scientific analysis pipelines. However, constructing these pipelines is a demanding task, requiring extensive domain knowledge and careful consideration. As the Bioinformatics landscape evolves, researchers, both novice and expert, may feel overwhelmed in unfamiliar fields, potentially leading to the selection of unsuitable tools during workflow development.

resultsIn this article, we introduce the Bioinformatics Tool Recommendation system (BTR), a deep learning model designed to recommend suitable tools for a given workflow-in-progress. BTR leverages recent advances in graph neural network technology, representing the workflow as a graph to capture essential context. Natural language processing techniques enhance tool recommendations by analyzing associated tool descriptions. Experiments demonstrate that BTR outperforms the existing Galaxy tool recommendation system, showcasing its potential to streamline scientific workflow construction. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: The Python source code is available at https://github.com/ryangreenj/bioinformatics_tool_recommendation.

Indexed as

Computational BiologySoftwareWorkflowDeep LearningNatural Language Processing

Identifiers

PMID38662583
PMCPMC11091741

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.