Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22837684›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2012

Structural DNA nanotechnology: from design to applications.

Reza M Zadegan, Michael L Norton

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing 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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. De novo design of RNA and nucleoprotein complexes.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. DNA Transformations for Diagnosis and Therapy.Advanced functional materials · 2021
    Review
  9. Constructing Large 2D Lattices Out of DNA-Tiles.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Dynamics of KThe European physical journal. E, Soft matter · 2020
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Nanobiolistics: An Emerging Genetic Transformation Approach.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2020
    Article
  15. CAGE: Chromatin Analogous Gene Expression.ACS synthetic biology · 2017
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Structural DNA nanotechnology: state of the art and future perspective.Journal of the American Chemical Society · 2014
    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

2 authors.

Reza M ZadeganCenter for DNA Nanotechnology (CDNA), Interdisciplinary Nanoscience Center (iNANO), Aarhus University, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark.
Michael L NortonDepartment of Chemistry, Marshall University, Huntington, WV 25755, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The exploitation of DNA for the production of nanoscale architectures presents a young yet paradigm breaking approach, which addresses many of the barriers to the self-assembly of small molecules into highly-ordered nanostructures via construct addressability. There are two major methods to construct DNA nanostructures, and in the current review we will discuss the principles and some examples of applications of both the tile-based and DNA origami methods. The tile-based approach is an older method that provides a good tool to construct small and simple structures, usually with multiply repeated domains. In contrast, the origami method, at this time, would appear to be more appropriate for the construction of bigger, more sophisticated and exactly defined structures.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsComputational BiologyDNANanostructuresNanotechnologyNucleic Acid ConformationSoftwareDNADNA nanotechnologyDNA origaminanostructuresself-assembly

Identifiers

PMID22837684
PMCPMC3397516

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.