+1 Recommend
1 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Topic Pages: PLoS Computational Biology Meets Wikipedia

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.


          While there has been much debate about the coverage and quality of Wikipedia (starting with an article in 2005 [1]), there is no doubt about its value (and increasing role) as a reference source and starting point for in-depth research. For example, within the biomedical sciences, there have been recent articles about the accuracy and completeness of drug information in Wikipedia [2], Wikipedia as a source of information in nursing care [3] and mental disorders [4], and making biological databases available through Wikipedia [5]. Is this the case for computational biology as well? Probably yes; however, at present our profession seems to gain more than it gives. We suggest a principal reason for this limited breadth and depth of coverage of topics in computational biology is one that affects a number of disciplines: reward. Authors in the biomedical sciences get academic reward for publishing papers in reputable journals that are indexed in PubMed and have associated digital object identifiers (DOIs). In contrast, contributions to Wikipedia can be anonymous and do not count for much in the current system of academic advancement. We hope to help to resolve this disparity in PLoS Computational Biology. This month, we have published our first Topic Page on “Circular Permutations in Proteins” by Spencer Bliven and Andreas Prlić [6] as part of our Education section. Topic Pages are the version of record of a page to be posted to (the English version of) Wikipedia. In other words, PLoS Computational Biology publishes a version that is static, includes author attributions, and is indexed in PubMed. In addition, we intend to make the reviews and reviewer identities of Topic Pages available to our readership. Our hope is that the Wikipedia pages subsequently become living documents that will be updated and enhanced by the Wikipedia community, assuming they are in keeping with Wikipedia's guidelines and policies, either by individuals, or, perhaps as is already happening in medicine and molecular and cell biology, by something more organized, or with a more formal review structure. We also hope this will lead to improved scholarship in a changing medium of learning, in this case made possible by the Creative Commons Attribution License that we use. Our Editorial Board has been enthusiastic in its support of this initiative and a number of Topic Pages are under development. We hope you will contribute too; please send ideas for Topic Pages to ploscompbiol@plos.org. We are looking for topics in computational biology that are of interest to our readership, the broader scientific community, and the public at large, and that are not yet covered, or only poorly so (i.e., exists as a “stub”), in Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Computational_Biology. Our guidelines for Topic Pages are available here: http://www.ploscompbiol.org/attachments/topicpages.pdf. Wikipedia is the world's most widely used knowledge source, and computational biology should be appropriately represented—please help. New uses of Wikipedia are being explored, as a recent example illustrates [7]. Who knows what you might be contributing to?

          Related collections

          Most cited references 6

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Internet encyclopaedias go head to head.

           Jim Giles (2005)
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Wikipedia as an evidence source for nursing and healthcare students

             Carol Haigh (2011)
            Where students once were confined to the University library, they are now at liberty to wander through cyber-space at will. There is evidence to suggest that student have been very quick to exploit the opportunities that the Internet can offer them. Students frequently cited search engines such as Google and Web 2.0 information sharing sites such as Wikipedia as the first places they look when seeking information for an assignment. Although a number of disciplines have accepted that Wikipedia can be viewed as an accurate and legitimate evidence source nurse educators tend to view Wikipedia with a degree of suspicion. The purpose of this paper is to carry out an exploratory study of health and health related content on a sample of Wikipedia site with the overall intention of assessing the quality of their source and supporting information. A 10% sample of health related Wikipedia entries were evaluated, with a total of 2598 references assessed. In total 1473 (56%) of the references citied on the Wikipedia pages reviewed could be argued to come from clearly identifiable reputable sources. This translates to a mean number of reputable sources of M=29 per Wikipedia entry. The quality of the evidence taken obtained from the 2500 plus references from over 50 Wikipedia pages was of sufficiently sound quality to suggest that, for health related entries, Wikipedia is appropriate for use by nursing students. Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Accuracy and completeness of drug information in Wikipedia: an assessment.


                Author and article information

                PLoS Comput Biol
                PLoS Comput. Biol
                PLoS Computational Biology
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, USA )
                March 2012
                March 2012
                29 March 2012
                : 8
                : 3
                [1 ]Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada
                [2 ]Department of Biochemistry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
                [3 ]Department of Molecular Genetics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
                [4 ]EvoMRI Communications, Jena, Germany
                [5 ]Open Knowledge Foundation Germany, Berlin, Germany
                [6 ]Public Library of Science, Cambridge, United Kingdom
                [7 ]Cell Networks, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
                [8 ]Department of Pharmacology, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California, United States of America
                [9 ]Skaggs School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California, United States of America
                Author notes

                Shoshana Wodak is the Topic Pages editor who makes decisions on what to publish; Daniel Mietchen is the technical editor for Topic Pages and, as Wikimedian in Residence on Open Science, helps to define the workflow for article submission and peer review. Andy Collings is the Editorial Manager of PLoS Computational Biology and helps to define the workflow from PLoS's perspective. Robert Russell had the original idea during discussions with Philip Bourne at the ISMB conference in 2011. Philip Bourne is the Editor-in-Chief of PLoS Computational Biology.

                Wodak et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
                Page count
                Pages: 1
                Science Policy
                Science Education

                Quantitative & Systems biology


                Comment on this article