Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22330769›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Genetics2012

Cellular genomics for complex traits.

Emmanouil T Dermitzakis

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Genetics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing 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

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Regulating appetite in broilers for improving body and muscle development - A review.Journal of animal physiology and animal nutrition · 2020
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. QuASAR: quantitative allele-specific analysis of reads.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2015
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Global genomic and transcriptomic analysis of human pancreatic islets reveals novel genes influencing glucose metabolism.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2014
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Using natural variation in Drosophila to discover previously unknown endoplasmic reticulum stress genes.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2013
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

1 author.

Emmanouil T DermitzakisDepartment of Genetic Medicine and Development, University of Geneva Medical School, 1 rue Michel-Servet, 1211 Geneva, Switzerland. emmanouil.dermitzakis@unige.ch

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent developments in the collection and analysis of cellular multilayered data in large cohorts with extensive organismal phenotyping promise to reveal links between genetic variation and biological processes. The use of these cellular resources as models for human biology - known as 'cellular phenotyping' - is likely to transform our understanding of the genetic and long-term environmental influences on complex traits. I discuss the advantages and caveats of a deeper analysis of cellular phenotypes in large cohorts and assess the methodological advances, resource needs and prospects of this new approach.

Indexed as

Genetic VariationGenomicsQuantitative Trait, HeritableHumansPhenotype

Identifiers

PMID22330769

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.