Side N
The Rise of Biomedical Foundation Models — 220 Models Surveyed
Which sources back which section of this article, and what its evidence base looks like.
Which sources back which section
| Section | Sources behind it |
|---|---|
| What Happened | Chang, Cheng, Modi et al., Nature Biotechnology (2026); the same paper’s open-access text, PubMed Central |
| Timeline | Chang, Cheng, Modi et al., Nature Biotechnology (2026); the same paper’s open-access text, PubMed Central; Lee et al., Bioinformatics (2020); Rives et al., PNAS (2021); Cui et al., Nature Methods (2024); Chen et al., Nature Medicine (2024); Hayes et al., Science (2025); Brixi et al., Nature (2026) |
| The Argument | Chang, Cheng, Modi et al., Nature Biotechnology (2026); the same paper’s open-access text, PubMed Central |
| What Others Add | Chang, Cheng, Modi et al., Nature Biotechnology (2026); the same paper’s open-access text, PubMed Central; Lee et al., Bioinformatics (2020); Rives et al., PNAS (2021); Chen et al., Nature Medicine (2024); Cui et al., Nature Methods (2024); Hayes et al., Science (2025); Brixi et al., Nature (2026) |
| Conclusion | Chang, Cheng, Modi et al., Nature Biotechnology (2026); the same paper’s open-access text, PubMed Central |
What the evidence base looks like
- 8Sources behind this article
- 5Sections, every one of them sourced
- 2Read in full
- 6Read at the abstract only
| What the source is | How many | How they were read |
|---|---|---|
| The survey itself, at its publisher and in its open-access copy | 2 | Read in full, the image of its main figure included, because the citation counts appear nowhere else |
| The original papers behind six of the models it names | 6 | All six read at the abstract, with their full citation records |
Reliable
Reliable, but with an interestWorth believing and reliableWeak on both, and used with careHonest, but thin
Worth believing