Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23897237›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Genetics2013

Single-cell sequencing-based technologies will revolutionize whole-organism science.

Ehud Shapiro, Tamir Biezuner, Sten Linnarsson

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Genetics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 602 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
602citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

602 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. scLGGCL: Label-Guided Graph Contrastive Learning for Single-Cell Fusion Clustering.Interdisciplinary sciences, computational life sciences · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

542 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

3 authors.

Ehud Shapiro1] Department of Computer Science and Applied Math, Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot 76100, Israel. [2] Department of Biological Chemistry, Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot 76100, Israel.
Tamir Biezuner
Sten Linnarsson

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The unabated progress in next-generation sequencing technologies is fostering a wave of new genomics, epigenomics, transcriptomics and proteomics technologies. These sequencing-based technologies are increasingly being targeted to individual cells, which will allow many new and longstanding questions to be addressed. For example, single-cell genomics will help to uncover cell lineage relationships; single-cell transcriptomics will supplant the coarse notion of marker-based cell types; and single-cell epigenomics and proteomics will allow the functional states of individual cells to be analysed. These technologies will become integrated within a decade or so, enabling high-throughput, multi-dimensional analyses of individual cells that will produce detailed knowledge of the cell lineage trees of higher organisms, including humans. Such studies will have important implications for both basic biological research and medicine.

Indexed as

GenomicsHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingSingle-Cell AnalysisAnimalsCell SeparationEpigenomicsGene Expression ProfilingHumansProteomics

Identifiers

PMID23897237

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.