ReviewStem cells international2016
The Rise of CRISPR/Cas for Genome Editing in Stem Cells.
Review in Stem cells international, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genome editing in mouse spermatogonial stem cell lines targeting the Tex15 gene using CRISPR/Cas9.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Article
- Exploring dysfunctional barrier phenotypes associated with glaucoma using a human pluripotent stem cell-based model of the neurovascular unit.Fluids and barriers of the CNS · 2024Article
- Gene editing rescue of a novelBlood advances · 2017Article
- Laminar flow downregulates Notch activity to promote lymphatic sprouting.The Journal of clinical investigation · 2017Article
- CRISPR Genome Engineering for Human Pluripotent Stem Cell Research.Theranostics · 2017Review
- Review
- Making sense of the cause of Crohn's - a new look at an old disease.F1000Research · 2016Review
- Ion channels and pain in Fabry disease.Molecular painReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Genetic manipulation is a powerful tool to establish the causal relationship between a genetic lesion and a particular pathological phenotype. The rise of CRISPR/Cas9 genome-engineering tools overcame the traditional technical bottleneck for routine site-specific genetic manipulation in cells. To create the perfect in vitro cell model, there is significant interest from the stem cell research community to adopt this fast evolving technology. This review addresses this need directly by providing both the up-to-date biochemical rationale of CRISPR-mediated genome engineering and detailed practical guidelines for the design and execution of CRISPR experiments in cell models. Ultimately, this review will serve as a timely and comprehensive guide for this fast developing technology.
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.