Putting epigenome comparison into practice.

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.

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.

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

1. A systematic guide for identifying transcription factors that directly regulate the expression of a gene of interest.Genome research · 2026
   Review
2. Enabling interspecies epigenomic comparison with CEpBrowser.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2013
   Article
3. Emerging patterns of epigenomic variation.Trends in genetics : TIG · 2011
   Review
4. The decade of the epigenomes?Genes & cancer · 2011
   Article
5. Epigenetics in breast cancer: what's new?Breast cancer research : BCR · 2011
   Review
6. Pash 3.0: A versatile software package for read mapping and integrative analysis of genomic and epigenomic variation using massively parallel DNA sequencing.BMC bioinformatics · 2010
   Article

Corrections and comments

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

Authors and funding

1 author.

Funding

Abstract

Indexed as