Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19468039›Full record

ReviewBriefings in functional genomics & proteomics2009

The human Major Histocompatibility Complex as a paradigm in genomics research.

Claire Vandiedonck, Julian C Knight

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Briefings in functional genomics & proteomics, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 62 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
62citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
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

62 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 117 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. The Immunology of Transfusion Medicine: Past, Present, and Future.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2026
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

2 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Claire VandiedonckWellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics (WTCHG), University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. vandiedo@well.ox.ac.uk
Julian C Knight
University of Oxford · GB

Funding

Wellcome Trust 074318
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Since its discovery more than 50 years ago, the human Major Histocompatibility Complex (MHC) on chromosome 6p21.3 has been at the forefront of human genetic research. Here, we review from a historical perspective the major advances in our understanding of the nature and consequences of genetic variation which have involved the MHC, as well as highlighting likely future directions. As a consequence of its particular genomic structure, its remarkable polymorphism and its early implication in numerous diseases, the MHC has been considered as a model region for genomics, being the first substantial region to be sequenced and establishing fundamental concepts of linkage disequilibrium, haplotypic structure and meiotic recombination. Recently, the MHC became the first genomic region to be entirely re-sequenced for common haplotypes, while studies mapping gene expression phenotypes across the genome have strongly implicated variation in the MHC. This review shows how the MHC continues to provide new insights and remains in the vanguard of contemporary research in human genomics.

Indexed as

GenomicsResearchGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseHumansLinkage DisequilibriumMajor Histocompatibility ComplexPolymorphism, Genetic

Identifiers

PMID19468039
PMCPMC2987720
OpenAlexW2107985990

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.