PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 11758303

Methodologists and their methods. Do methodologists write up their conference presentations or is it just 15 minutes of fame?

S Hopewell·M Clarke
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To assess the extent to which abstracts of methodological research, initially presented at meetings on systematic reviews, have gone on to be published as full articles. METHODS: Full publication was assessed in three ways: a search was carried out of The Cochrane Library; a search was conducted using MEDLINE; and a questionnaire was sent to the contact author of each abstract. RESULTS: Approximately half of the abstracts had not been, or were unlikely ever to be, published in full. CONCLUSIONS: The rate of full publication of abstracts related to the methodology of systematic reviews seems similar to that for randomized trials.

Explore related subjects

Abstracting and IndexingCongresses as TopicEvidence-Based MedicineHealth Services ResearchHumansMeta-Analysis as TopicPublication BiasRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicResearch DesignUnited KingdomComparative StudyJournal ArticleResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

S Hopewell, M Clarke. 2001. Methodologists and their methods. Do methodologists write up their conference presentations or is it just 15 minutes of fame?. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11758303/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2004

Statistically rigorous automated protein annotation.

MOTIVATION: Assignment of putative protein functional annotation by comparative analysis using pre-defined experimental annotations is performed routinely by molecular biologists. The number and statistical significance of these assignments remains a challenge in this era of high-throughput proteomics. A combined statistical method that enables robust, automated protein annotation by reliably expanding existing annotation sets is described. An existing clustering scheme, based on relevant experimental information (e.g. sequence identity, keywords or gene expression data) is required. The method assigns new proteins to these clusters with a measure of reliability. It can also provide human reviewers with a reliability score for both new and previously classified proteins. RESULTS: A dataset of 27 000 annotated Protein Data Bank (PDB) polypeptide chains (of 36 000 chains currently in the PDB) was generated from 23 000 chains classified a priori. AVAILABILITY: PDB annotations and sample software implementation are freely accessible on the Web at http://pmr.sdsc.edu/go

Abstracting and Indexing↗
PubMed2004

Confirmation of data mining based predictions of protein function.

MOTIVATION: A central problem in bioinformatics is the assignment of function to sequenced open reading frames (ORFs). The most common approach is based on inferred homology using a statistically based sequence similarity (SIM) method, e.g. PSI-BLAST. Alternative non-SIM based bioinformatic methods are becoming popular. One such method is Data Mining Prediction (DMP). This is based on combining evidence from amino-acid attributes, predicted structure and phylogenic patterns; and uses a combination of Inductive Logic Programming data mining, and decision trees to produce prediction rules for functional class. DMP predictions are more general than is possible using homology. In 2000/1, DMP was used to make public predictions of the function of 1309 Escherichia coli ORFs. Since then biological knowledge has advanced allowing us to test our predictions. RESULTS: We examined the updated (20.02.02) Riley group genome annotation, and examined the scientific literature for direct experimental derivations of ORF function. Both tests confirmed the DMP predictions. Accuracy varied between rules, and with the detail of prediction, but they were generally significantly better than random. For voting rules, accuracies of 75-100% were obtained. Twenty-one of these DMP predictions have been confirmed by direct experimentation. The DMP rules also have interesting biological explanations. DMP is, to the best of our knowledge, the first non-SIM based prediction method to have been tested directly on new data. AVAILABILITY: We have designed the "Genepredictions" database for protein functional predictions. This is intended to act as an open repository for predictions for any organism and can be accessed at http://www.genepredictions.org

Abstracting and Indexing↗
PubMed2004

CLENCH: a program for calculating Cluster ENriCHment using the Gene Ontology.

SUMMARY: Analysis of microarray data most often produces lists of genes with similar expression patterns, which are then subdivided into functional categories for biological interpretation. Such functional categorization is most commonly accomplished using Gene Ontology (GO) categories. Although there are several programs that identify and analyze functional categories for human, mouse and yeast genes, none of them accept Arabidopsis thaliana data. In order to address this need for A.thaliana community, we have developed a program that retrieves GO annotations for A.thaliana genes and performs functional category analysis for lists of genes selected by the user. AVAILABILITY: http://www.personal.psu.edu/nhs109/Clench

Abstracting and Indexing↗