ArticleMethods and protocols2024
Simplifying Data Analysis in Biomedical Research: An Automated, User-Friendly Tool.
Article in Methods and protocols, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rapid FTIR Spectral Fingerprinting of Kidney Allograft Perfusion Fluids Distinguishes DCD from DBD Donors: A Pilot Machine Learning Study.Metabolites · 2025Article
- Multiplex Targeted Proteomic Analysis of Cytokine Ratios for ICU Mortality in Severe COVID-19.Proteomes · 2025Article
- The future of pharmaceuticals: Artificial intelligence in drug discovery and development.Journal of pharmaceutical analysis · 2025Review
- Cytokine-Based Insights into Bloodstream Infections and Bacterial Gram Typing in ICU COVID-19 Patients.Metabolites · 2025Article
- Integration of FTIR Spectroscopy and Machine Learning for Kidney Allograft Rejection: A Complementary Diagnostic Tool.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Robust data normalization and analysis are pivotal in biomedical research to ensure that observed differences in populations are directly attributable to the target variable, rather than disparities between control and study groups. ArsHive addresses this challenge using advanced algorithms to normalize populations (e.g., control and study groups) and perform statistical evaluations between demographic, clinical, and other variables within biomedical datasets, resulting in more balanced and unbiased analyses. The tool's functionality extends to comprehensive data reporting, which elucidates the effects of data processing, while maintaining dataset integrity. Additionally, ArsHive is complemented by A.D.A. (Autonomous Digital Assistant), which employs OpenAI's GPT-4 model to assist researchers with inquiries, enhancing the decision-making process. In this proof-of-concept study, we tested ArsHive on three different datasets derived from proprietary data, demonstrating its effectiveness in managing complex clinical and therapeutic information and highlighting its versatility for diverse research fields.
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.