ArticleHistory and philosophy of the life sciences2026
New visual culture of science: analysis of graphical abstracts in the life science journal "Cell".
Article in History and philosophy of the life sciences, 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
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Driven by the shift towards online journal publishing, many academic journals have introduced graphical abstracts (GAs) since the 2000s to convey the primary findings of research papers. This study investigated this visual culture in life sciences by analyzing GAs with focus on content, representation, and background. In total, 333 GAs were collected from articles published in the journal Cell in 2021 and analyzed. Among these, 295 GAs (88.6%) explained the results and models and succinctly presented the key findings, and 251 GAs (75.4%) used a layout that divided the area into two or more sections. New graphics that were not present in the main text were featured in 222 GAs (66.7%), indicating substantial investment in their creation. The GAs shared commonalities with modern infographics commonly seen on the internet, which emphasize clarity. The increased used of GAs may be attributed to the need for "instant comprehension," which is an epistemic virtue reinforced by authors, readers, and journals and driven by the scientific self of "surviving researchers and journals" in a competitive scientific environment.
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.