The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
An evaluation of human protein-protein interaction data in the public domain
Open accessAbstract
Background: Protein-protein interaction (PPI) databases have become a major resource for investigating biological networks and pathways in cells. A number of publicly available repositories for human PPIs are currently available. Each of these databases has their own unique features with a large variation in the type and depth of their annotations. Results: We analyzed the major publicly available primary databases that contain literature curated PPI information for human proteins. This included BIND, DIP, HPRD, IntAct, MINT, MIPS, PDZBase and Reactome databases. The number of binary non-redundant human PPIs ranged from 101 in PDZBase and 346 in MIPS to 11,367 in MINT and 36,617 in HPRD. The number of genes annotated with at least one interactor was 9,427 in HPRD, 4,975 in MINT, 4,614 in IntAct, 3,887 in BIND and <1,000 in the remaining databases. The number of literature citations for the PPIs included in the databases was 43,634 in HPRD, 11,480 in MINT, 10,331 in IntAct, 8,020 in BIND and <2,100 in the remaining databases. Conclusion: Given the importance of PPIs, we suggest that submission of PPIs to repositories be made mandatory by scientific journals at the time of manuscript submission as this will minimize annotation errors, promote standardization and help keep the information up to date. We hope that our analysis will help guide biomedical scientists in selecting the most appropriate database for their needs especially in light of the dramatic differences in their content.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Cytoscape: A software Environment for integrated models of biomolecular interaction networks
Shannon, P., Markiel, A., Ozier, O., Baliga, N. S., Wang, J. T., Ramage, D., Amin, N., Schwikowski, B., & Ideker, T. (2003) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.1239303 · Cited by 51,888
Systematic Discovery of New Recognition Peptides Mediating Protein Interaction Networks
Neduva, V., Linding, R., Su-Angrand, I., Stark, A., Masi, F. D., Gibson, T. J., Lewis, J., Serrano, L., & Russell, R. B. (2005) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0030405 · Cited by 359
Cited by
Ideker, T., & Sharan, R. (2008) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.071852.107 · Cited by 817
Neuroscience in the era of functional genomics and systems biology
Geschwind, D. H., & Konopka, G. (2009) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature08537 · Cited by 213
Common dysregulation network in the human prefrontal cortex underlies two neurodegenerative diseases
Narayanan, M., Huynh, J. L., Wang, K., Yang, X., Yoo, S., McElwee, J., Zhang, B., Zhang, C., Lamb, J. R., Xie, T., et al. (2014) · Molecular Systems Biology · doi:10.15252/msb.20145304 · Cited by 208
Epigenetic profiling of human brain differential DNA methylation networks in schizophrenia
Lee, S.-A., & Huang, K.-C. (2016) · BMC Medical Genomics · doi:10.1186/s12920-016-0229-y · Cited by 46
Börner, K., Hermle, J., Sommer, C., Brown, N. P., Knapp, B., Glass, B., Kunkel, J., Torralba, G., Reymann, J., Beil, N., et al. (2010) · Biotechnology Journal · doi:10.1002/biot.200900226 · Cited by 43
Metadata
- Authors
- Mathivanan, S., Periaswamy, B., Gandhi, T., Kandasamy, K., Suresh, S., Mohmood, R., Ramachandra, Y., & Pandey, A.
- Venue
- BMC Bioinformatics
- Published
- 2006-12
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- S5
- Pages
- S19-S19
- ISSN
- 1471-2105 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2060460012
- Cited by
- 232
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 9.45
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: An evaluation of human protein-protein interaction data in the public domain. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/1471-2105-7-s5-s19
- The paper
- Mathivanan, S., Periaswamy, B., Gandhi, T., Kandasamy, K., Suresh, S., Mohmood, R., Ramachandra, Y., & Pandey, A. (2006). An evaluation of human protein-protein interaction data in the public domain. BMC Bioinformatics. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-7-s5-s19
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.