Promoting coherent minimum reporting guidelines for biological and biomedical investigations: the MIBBI project

Article metrics

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Figure 1: The eighteen highest-ranked ad hoc concepts, according to Table 1.

References

  1. 1

    Quackenbush, J. Standardizing the standards. Mol. Syst. Biol. 2, 2006.0010 (2006).

  2. 2

    Anonymous. Under the MIAME sun. Nat. Methods 3, 415 (2006).

  3. 3

    Brazma, A. et al. Minimum information about a microarray experiment (MIAME)—toward standards for microarray data. Nat. Genet. 29, 365–371 (2001).

  4. 4

    Anonymous. Microarray standards at last. Nature 419, 323 (2002).

  5. 5

    Ball, C.A. et al. A guide to microarray experiments—an open letter to the scientific journals. Lancet 360, 1019 (2002).

  6. 6

    Ball, C.A. et al. Standards for microarray data. Science 298, 539 (2002).

  7. 7

    Ball, C.A. et al. The underlying principles of scientific publication. Bioinformatics 18, 1409 (2002).

  8. 8

    Taylor, C.F. et al. The minimum information about a proteomics experiment (MIAPE). Nat. Biotechnol. 25, 887–893 (2007).

  9. 9

    Le Novère, N. et al. Minimum information requested in the annotation of biochemical models (MIRIAM). Nat. Biotechnol. 23, 1509–1515 (2005).

  10. 10

    Altman, D.G., Simera, I., Hoey, J., Moher, D. & Schulz, K. EQUATOR: reporting guidelines for health research. Lancet 371, 1149–1150 (2008).

  11. 11

    Field, D. & Sansone, S.-A. A special issue on data standards. OMICS 10, 84–93 (2006).

  12. 12

    Morrison, N. et al. Concept of sample in OMICS technology. OMICS 10, 127–137 (2006).

  13. 13

    Morrison, N. et al. Standard annotation of environmental OMICS data: application to the transcriptomics domain. OMICS 10, 172–178 (2006).

  14. 14

    Jones, A.R. et al. The Functional Genomics Experiment model (FuGE): an extensible framework for standards in functional genomics. Nat. Biotechnol. 25, 1127–1133 (2007).

  15. 15

    Sansone, S.-A. et al. A strategy capitalizing on synergies: the Reporting Structure for Biological Investigation (RSBI) working group. OMICS 10, 164–171 (2006).

  16. 16

    Sansone, S.-A. et al. The first RSBI (ISA-TAB) workshop: “Can a simple format work for complex studies?” OMICS published online, doi:10.1089/omi.2008.0019 (2008).

  17. 17

    Smith, B. et al. The OBO Foundry: coordinated evolution of ontologies to support biomedical data integration. Nat. Biotechnol. 25, 1251–1255 (2007).

  18. 18

    Taylor, C.F. et al. The work of the Human Proteome Organisation's Proteomics Standards Initiative (HUPO PSI). OMICS 10, 145–151 (2006).

  19. 19

    Fiehn, O. et al. Establishing reporting standards for metabolomic and metabonomic studies: a call for participation. OMICS 10, 158–163 (2006).

  20. 20

    Field, D. et al. The minimum information about a genome sequence (MIGS) specification. Nat. Biotechnol. 26, 541–547 (2008).

  21. 21

    Deutsch, E.W. et al. Minimum information specification for in situ hybridization and immunohistochemistry experiments (MISFISHIE). Nat. Biotechnol. 26, 305–312 (2008).

Download references

Acknowledgements

We. acknowledge funding from the UK Natural Environmental Research Council's Environmental Bioinformatics Centre and the UK Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BB/E025080/1) to D.F. and S.-A.S. to support C.F.T. and MIBBI. Work on MIFlowCyt is supported by the US National Institutes of Health's National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (EB005034-01) and by Bioinformatics Integration Support Contract A140076 from the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. R.R.B. is supported by the Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research, by the International Society for the Advancement of Cytology and by grant funding from the US National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, National Institutes of Health (R01EB005034). N.W.H. acknowledges the support of the European Union Framework VI project META-PHOR (Food-ST-2006-03622). F.G., P.L. and work on CARMEN are supported by the UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/E002331/1). K.T. acknowledges support from Science Foundation Ireland. Work on MIAME/Tox and MIAME/Nutr by P.R-S. is supported by the NuGO (NoE 503630) and CarcinoGenomics (PL 037712) European Union projects. Work on MIARE is supported by the eDIKT project. Opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the US National Science Foundation or the US National Institutes of Health.

Author information

Correspondence to Chris F Taylor or Dawn Field or Susanna-Assunta Sansone.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

D.F., S.-A.S. and C.F.T. conceived and designed the concept of MIBBI as synergistic project; D.F. and S.-A.S. raised the funds to support MIBBI activities, and C.F.T. performed the analysis presented in this paper; all authors discussed the results and implications and commented on the manuscript.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Text and Figures

Supplementary Figures 1–2 (PDF 422 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Further reading