Editing Searching public knowledge

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.

Latest revision Your text
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Topic Infobox}}
+
Public knowledge resources can make a good starting point, e.g. to identify interventions one can try and that are likely to work. This wiki can be a starting point by browsing topics of interest and visiting the links in the articles find basic common knowledge about a given topic from the perspective of health tracking. The most dependable source of information is from your government.<ref>https://medlineplus.gov/</ref> When searching add 'site:.gov' to the end of your query. Wikipedia is less reliable. Research papers are for more advanced researching.   
Public knowledge resources can make a good starting point, e.g. to identify interventions one can try and that are likely to work. This wiki can be a starting point by browsing topics of interest and visiting the links in the articles find basic common knowledge about a given topic from the perspective of health tracking.  
 
  
The most reliable source of information (besides your doctor), is from the government.<ref>https://medlineplus.gov/</ref> When searching add 'site:.gov' to the end of your query. Wikipedia is less reliable.   
+
Additionally, it might be worth looking for more details or the cutting edge of science for interventions. Depending on the topic in question there might be communities which compile such detailed information, e.g. the communities [[Tools for Cognitive Testing|rNootropics]] and [[Diet tracking tools|rNutrition]] compile great lists of research conducted and advice. Depending on the topic and specific question, it may be bad to rely solely on epidemiological studies without looking at other types of studies.<ref>https://old.reddit.com/r/nutrition/comments/tby2ye/about_scientific_studies_on_nutrition_from_a/</ref>   
 
 
Additionally, it might be worth looking for more details or the cutting edge of science for interventions. Or maybe not?<ref>https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/fFY2HeC9i2Tx8FEnK/my-resentful-story-of-becoming-a-medical-miracle</ref> Depending on the topic in question there might be communities which compile such detailed information, e.g. the communities [[Tools for Cognitive Testing|rNootropics]] and [[Diet tracking tools|rNutrition]] compile great lists of research conducted and advice. Formal research papers are difficult. Search for metanalyses because they are a compilation of other studies. Use advanced search tools like ontologies.<ref>www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/68008568</ref> Depending on the topic and specific question, it may be bad to rely solely on epidemiological studies without looking at other types of studies.<ref>https://old.reddit.com/r/nutrition/comments/tby2ye/about_scientific_studies_on_nutrition_from_a/</ref>   
 
  
 
See also [[Resources]]
 
See also [[Resources]]
Line 10: Line 7:
 
== Papers ==
 
== Papers ==
 
https://www.lens.org
 
https://www.lens.org
 
chatgpt's scholarai
 
  
 
https://elicit.org GPT-3 Powered. Transforms every sentence into every other relevant sentence so user does not need to rephrase anything. Also gives the exact sentence that answers the user's question.   
 
https://elicit.org GPT-3 Powered. Transforms every sentence into every other relevant sentence so user does not need to rephrase anything. Also gives the exact sentence that answers the user's question.   
Line 18: Line 13:
 
* Does mindfulness improve decision-making?
 
* Does mindfulness improve decision-making?
 
* What are the effects of sleep training on infants?
 
* What are the effects of sleep training on infants?
consensus.app like elicit. will also suggest citations for your statements.
+
https://www.semanticscholar.org
 
 
https://www.semanticscholar.org the backend for consensus and elicit.
 
  
 
https://www.scinapse.io
 
https://www.scinapse.io
  
 
https://examine.com Search name of diet supplement get summary and all papers on the subject. recommended by LW guy too.
 
https://examine.com Search name of diet supplement get summary and all papers on the subject. recommended by LW guy too.
 
litmaps.com network graphs of citations
 
 
researchrabbit like litmaps
 
 
microsoft academic graph like litmaps
 
  
 
== Knowledge Graphs ==
 
== Knowledge Graphs ==
Knowledge graphs link information through triplets. Nodes can be topics like "supplement", which could be connected to a node like "disease" with an edge that says "reduces chance". This would mean that some supplement reduces chance of some disease. The biomindmap.com tool is a "collaborative knowledge manager" <ref>[https://biomindmap.com/nodes/1399 https://biomindmap.com/nodes/620]</ref>. To contribute you must read the abstracts of the papers supporting each link. Be careful though, the highest rated herb for improving cognition actually reduces stress. Curedao<ref>studies.curedao.org/variables/Cognitive_Speed_Score_From_Lumosity</ref> uses user contributed data instead of papers.  
+
Knowledge graphs link information through triplets. Nodes can be topics like "supplement", which could be connected to a node like "disease" with an edge that says "reduces chance". This would mean that some supplement reduces chance of some disease. The biomindmap.com tool is a "collaborative knowledge manager" <ref>[https://biomindmap.com/nodes/1399 https://biomindmap.com/nodes/620]</ref>. To contribute you must read the abstracts of the papers supporting each link. Be careful though, the highest rated herb for improving cognition actually reduces stress.  
  
 
=== Biomedical Knowledge Graphs ===
 
=== Biomedical Knowledge Graphs ===
Line 45: Line 32:
  
 
== References ==
 
== References ==
[[Category:Experiment design]]
+
[[Category:Topics]]

Please note that all contributions to Personal Science Wiki are considered to be released under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (see PersonalScienceWiki:Copyrights for details). If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource. Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

Cancel Editing help (opens in new window)

Template used on this page: