<HashMap><database>biostudies-literature</database><scores/><additional><submitter>Stoeger T</submitter><funding>National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases</funding><funding>Simons Foundation</funding><funding>NIA NIH HHS</funding><funding>NIAID NIH HHS</funding><funding>John and Leslie McGown</funding><funding>Air Force Office of Scientific Research</funding><funding>National Institute on Aging</funding><funding>National Science Foundation</funding><pagination>e3001520</pagination><full_dataset_link>https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC8769369</full_dataset_link><repository>biostudies-literature</repository><omics_type>Unknown</omics_type><volume>20(1)</volume><pubmed_abstract>Throughout the last 2 decades, several scholars observed that present day research into human genes rarely turns toward genes that had not already been extensively investigated in the past. Guided by hypotheses derived from studies of science and innovation, we present here a literature-wide data-driven meta-analysis to identify the specific scientific and organizational contexts that coincided with early-stage research into human genes throughout the past half century. We demonstrate that early-stage research into human genes differs in team size, citation impact, funding mechanisms, and publication outlet, but that generalized insights derived from studies of science and innovation only partially apply to early-stage research into human genes. Further, we demonstrate that, presently, gen</pubmed_abstract><journal>PLoS biology</journal><pubmed_title>The characteristics of early-stage research into human genes are substantially different from subsequent research.</pubmed_title><pmcid>PMC8769369</pmcid><funding_grant_id>DMS-1764421</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>1956338</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>FA9550-19-1-0354</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>U19AI135964</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>K99AG068544</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>U19 AI135964</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>K99 AG068544</funding_grant_id><pubmed_authors>Nunes Amaral LA</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Stoeger T</pubmed_authors></additional><is_claimable>false</is_claimable><name>The characteristics of early-stage research into human genes are substantially different from subsequent research.</name><description>Throughout the last 2 decades, several scholars observed that present day research into human genes rarely turns toward genes that had not already been extensively investigated in the past. Guided by hypotheses derived from studies of science and innovation, we present here a literature-wide data-driven meta-analysis to identify the specific scientific and organizational contexts that coincided with early-stage research into human genes throughout the past half century. We demonstrate that early-stage research into human genes differs in team size, citation impact, funding mechanisms, and publication outlet, but that generalized insights derived from studies of science and innovation only partially apply to early-stage research into human genes. Further, we demonstrate that, presently, gen</description><dates><release>2022-01-01T00:00:00Z</release><publication>2022 Jan</publication><modification>2026-05-08T23:35:33.41Z</modification><creation>2022-02-11T16:16:31.912Z</creation></dates><accession>S-EPMC8769369</accession><cross_references><pubmed>34990452</pubmed><doi>10.1371/journal.pbio.3001520</doi></cross_references></HashMap>