ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2026
Literature-informed gene extraction and ranking for multimodal data fusion.
Article in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Published biomedical experiments provide an increasingly rich collection of results and identify genes potentially involved in diverse biological mechanisms. However, individual studies are often confined to narrow experimental contexts and are restricted to single omics layers. Cross-study knowledge aggregation can broaden this perspective and enable the construction of global, context-aware gene rankings. Recent developments in natural language processing have made large-scale literature mining increasingly feasible. This enables the systematic extraction and fusion of symbolic knowledge from published experiments. We present pathXcite, a software that extracts genes associated with specific contexts, such as diseases or biological mechanisms from the literature, and ranks them by contextual relevance. These relevance-based gene rankings can compress a scientific context into a symbolic representation. This representation enables diverse downstream analyses, including cross-context comparisons, network-based analysis, enrichment analysis, and integration with experimental omics data. In multiple use cases, we show how our extraction and fusion strategy can be applied to uncover hidden aspects in biological data.
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.