curation
or is it just an idea that's ahead of the curve?
Last week, I was stunned to discover at least 31 papers in an NCBI Gene database entry that were in the entry for the wrong gene. I wrote about this here, here, here, and here.
Now, an oversight like this is a little understandable. The titles of the entries do include the name of the wrong gene (DRD2 - the dopamine D2 receptor). And it was only four years ago that people figured out that the marker in the title of the articles mapped somewhere else.
If computers were responsible for the annotation, well, this would be understandable.…