IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/worpat/v30y2008i4p300-308.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A comparative study of patent sequence databases

Author

Listed:
  • Andree, Piet Jan
  • Harper, Mark F.
  • Nauche, Stéphane
  • Poolman, Robert A.
  • Shaw, Jo
  • Swinkels, Joop C.
  • Wycherley, Sally

Abstract

Nucleic acid and protein sequence data from patent publications is available from a plurality of commercial and public sources. As the searching and analysis of this data is of crucial importance to the life sciences industry, the Patent Documentation Group's Biotechnology Information Working Group conducted a study to critically compare and evaluate patent sequence databases for data content. A series of sequences were searched to find similar sequences from several well known sources: GENESEQ(TM), CAS REGISTRY/CAplusSM, PCTGEN, NCBI GenBank®, EMBL-Bank and the EBI Fasta databases. The study highlights some differences between GENESEQ(TM) and REGISTRY/CAplusSM results within the context of indexing policy and patent coverage. In comparison to the proprietary databases, the authors have identified important deficiencies in the content of the public databanks. This paper also discusses database timeliness and the choice of algorithm as potential reasons for missing data.

Suggested Citation

  • Andree, Piet Jan & Harper, Mark F. & Nauche, Stéphane & Poolman, Robert A. & Shaw, Jo & Swinkels, Joop C. & Wycherley, Sally, 2008. "A comparative study of patent sequence databases," World Patent Information, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 300-308, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:worpat:v:30:y:2008:i:4:p:300-308
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0172-2190(08)00047-1
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:worpat:v:30:y:2008:i:4:p:300-308. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/654/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.