Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20829207›Full record

ArticleBriefings in functional genomics2010

Identification and resolution of artifacts in the interpretation of imprinted gene expression.

Charlotte Proudhon, Déborah Bourc'his

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Briefings in functional genomics, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing 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

25 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Epigenetics · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Parental bias in expression and interaction of genes in the equine placenta.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  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.

Charlotte ProudhonInstitut Curie in Paris, France.
Déborah Bourc'his

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genomic imprinting refers to genes that are epigenetically programmed in the germline to express exclusively or preferentially one allele in a parent-of-origin manner. Expression-based genome-wide screening for the identification of imprinted genes has failed to uncover a significant number of new imprinted genes, probably because of the high tissue- and developmental-stage specificity of imprinted gene expression. A very large number of technical and biological artifacts can also lead to the erroneous evidence of imprinted gene expression. In this article, we focus on three common sources of potential confounding effects: (i) random monoallelic expression in monoclonal cell populations, (ii) genetically determined monoallelic expression and (iii) contamination or infiltration of embryonic tissues with maternal material. This last situation specifically applies to genes that occur as maternally expressed in the placenta. Beside the use of reciprocal crosses that are instrumental to confirm the parental specificity of expression, we provide additional methods for the detection and elimination of these situations that can be misinterpreted as cases of imprinted expression.

Indexed as

ArtifactsGene ExpressionGenomic ImprintingAllelesAnimalsFemaleGenetic TestingGenomeHumansMicePlacentaPregnancy

Identifiers

PMID20829207
PMCPMC3080772

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.