Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26000845›Full record

ReviewMolecular cell2015

Advances and applications of single-cell sequencing technologies.

Yong Wang, Nicholas E Navin

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Molecular cell, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 334 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
334citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

334 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Redefining oropharyngeal cancer in the HPV era: integrating precision medicine and immunotherapeutic frontiers.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Quantitative Analysis of Embryo Gene Expression by Real-Time PCR.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2026
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

274 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

2 authors.

Yong WangDepartment of Genetics, University of Texas, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
Nicholas E NavinDepartment of Genetics, University of Texas, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA; Department of Bioinformatics and Computational Biology, University of Texas, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. Electronic address: nnavin@mdanderson.org.

Funding

Single-Cell Sequencing of Breast Tumors to Investigate Genome EvolutionR01CA169244 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI NAVIN, NICHOLAS · 2012 to 2016
$1.6M
NCI NIH HHS 1R01CA169244-01NCI NIH HHS R01 CA169244
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Single-cell sequencing (SCS) has emerged as a powerful new set of technologies for studying rare cells and delineating complex populations. Over the past 5 years, SCS methods for DNA and RNA have had a broad impact on many diverse fields of biology, including microbiology, neurobiology, development, tissue mosaicism, immunology, and cancer research. In this review, we will discuss SCS technologies and applications, as well as translational applications in the clinic.

Indexed as

AnimalsBiomedical ResearchForecastingGenomicsHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansSingle-Cell Analysis

Identifiers

PMID26000845
PMCPMC4441954

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.