Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24074859›Full record

ReviewCell2013

The next-generation sequencing revolution and its impact on genomics.

Daniel C Koboldt, Karyn Meltz Steinberg, David E Larson, Richard K Wilson, Elaine R Mardis

Open access · bronzeAbstract readHistorical ArticleReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cell, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 452 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
452citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
36.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

452 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 1,035 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

392 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Daniel C KoboldtThe Genome Institute, School of Medicine, Washington University, St. Louis, MO 63108, USA.
Karyn Meltz Steinberg
David E Larson
Richard K Wilson
Elaine R Mardis
Washington University in St. Louis · US

Funding

Large Scale Genome SequencingU54HG003079 · NHGRI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI DUTCHER, SUSAN K · 2004 to 2016
$445.7M
NHGRI NIH HHS U54 HG003079
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genomics is a relatively new scientific discipline, having DNA sequencing as its core technology. As technology has improved the cost and scale of genome characterization over sequencing's 40-year history, the scope of inquiry has commensurately broadened. Massively parallel sequencing has proven revolutionary, shifting the paradigm of genomics to address biological questions at a genome-wide scale. Sequencing now empowers clinical diagnostics and other aspects of medical care, including disease risk, therapeutic identification, and prenatal testing. This Review explores the current state of genomics in the massively parallel sequencing era.

Indexed as

GenomicsAnimalsDiseaseGenetic VariationHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHistory, 20th CenturyHistory, 21st CenturyHumansMutationSequence Analysis, DNA

Identifiers

PMID24074859
PMCPMC3969849
OpenAlexW2017952818

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.