ArticleAndrology2015
Improved detection of disease-associated variation by sex-specific characterization and prediction of genes required for fertility.
Article in Andrology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predicting Male Infertility Using Artificial Neural Networks: A Review of the Literature.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Multiplex shRNA Screening of Germ Cell Development by in Vivo Transfection of Mouse Testis.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Despite its great potential, high-throughput functional genomic data are rarely integrated and applied to characterizing the genomic basis of fertility. We obtained and reprocessed over 30 functional genomics datasets from human and mouse germ cells to perform genome-wide prediction of genes underlying various reproductive phenotypes in both species. Genes involved in male fertility are easier to predict than their female analogs. Of the multiple genomic data types examined, protein-protein interactions are by far the most informative for gene prediction, followed by gene expression, and then epigenetic marks. As an application of our predictions, we show that copy number variants (CNVs) disrupting predicted fertility genes are more strongly associated with gonadal dysfunction in male and female case-control cohorts when compared to all gene-disrupting CNVs (OR = 1.64, p < 1.64 × 10(-8) vs. OR = 1.25, p < 4 × 10(-6)). Using gender-specific fertility gene annotations further increased the observed associations (OR = 2.31, p < 2.2 × 10(-16)). We provide our gene predictions as a resource with this article.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.