Abstract
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].
Highlights
Is this the case for computational biology as well? Probably yes; 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)
Summary
Is this the case for computational biology as well? Probably yes; at present our profession seems to gain more than it gives. Is this the case for computational biology as well? 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).
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
