Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26953268›Full record

ReviewGenetics2016

CRISPR-Based Methods for Caenorhabditis elegans Genome Engineering.

Daniel J Dickinson, Bob Goldstein

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Genetics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 202 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
202citing papers in PubMed
–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

202 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Glycolytic Specialization Shapes Neuronal Physiology and FunctionbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  13. Article
  14. TAG-IN, a swappable strategy for endogenous gene tagging inbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  15. FLInt 2.0: Robust and customizable single shot integration inbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

142 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.

Daniel J DickinsonDepartment of Biology and Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599-3280 ddickins@live.unc.edu.
Bob GoldsteinDepartment of Biology and Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599-3280.

Funding

Integrated Training in Cancer Model SystemsT32CA009156 · NCI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI DER, CHANNING J. · 1985 to 2020
$19.7M
Mechanisms of C. elegans GastrulationR01GM083071 · NIGMS · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI GOLDSTEIN, ROBERT P · 2008 to 2019
$3.7M
Howard Hughes Medical InstituteNCI NIH HHS T32 CA009156NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM083071
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The advent of genome editing techniques based on the clustered regularly interspersed short palindromic repeats (CRISPR)-Cas9 system has revolutionized research in the biological sciences. CRISPR is quickly becoming an indispensible experimental tool for researchers using genetic model organisms, including the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans. Here, we provide an overview of CRISPR-based strategies for genome editing in C. elegans. We focus on practical considerations for successful genome editing, including a discussion of which strategies are best suited to producing different kinds of targeted genome modifications.

Indexed as

CRISPR-Cas SystemsAnimalsCaenorhabditis elegansDNA RepairGenetic EngineeringMutagenesis, Site-DirectedCaenorhabditis elegansCRISPR/Cas9genome editingWormBook

Identifiers

PMID26953268
PMCPMC4788126

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.