Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12049172›Full record

ReviewThe pharmacogenomics journal2002

Progress in high throughput SNP genotyping methods.

Z Tsuchihashi, N C Dracopoli

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in The pharmacogenomics journal, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

50 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Z TsuchihashiClinical Discovery Technologies, Bristol-Myers Squibb Co, Princeton, NJ 08543-5400, USA. zenta.tsuchihashi@bms.com
N C Dracopoli

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Most current single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) genotyping methods are still too slow and expensive for routine use in large association studies with hundreds or more SNPs in a large number of DNA samples. However, SNP genotyping technology is rapidly progressing with the emergence of novel, faster and cheaper methods as well as improvements in the existing methods. In this review, we focus on technologies aimed at high throughput uses, and discuss the technical advances made in this field in the last few years. The rapid progress in technology, in combination with the discovery of millions of SNPs and the development of the human haplotype map, may enable whole genome association studies to be initiated in the near future.

Indexed as

AnimalsGenomicsGenotypeHumansPolymorphism, Single Nucleotide

Identifiers

PMID12049172

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.