Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26988438›Full record

ReviewTrends in molecular medicine2016

Human Knockout Carriers: Dead, Diseased, Healthy, or Improved?

Vagheesh M Narasimhan, Yali Xue, Chris Tyler-Smith

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Trends in molecular medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Emerging significance of butyrylcholinesterase.World journal of experimental medicine · 2024
    Review
  4. Essential genes: a cross-species perspective.Mammalian genome : official journal of the International Mammalian Genome Society · 2023
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. The genetic structure of the Turkish population reveals high levels of variation and admixture.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Avian genomics lends insights into endocrine function in birds.General and comparative endocrinology · 2018
    Review
  20. Human gene essentiality.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2018
    Review
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

3 authors.

Vagheesh M NarasimhanWellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Hinxton, Cambridge CB10 1SA, UK.
Yali XueWellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Hinxton, Cambridge CB10 1SA, UK.
Chris Tyler-SmithWellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Hinxton, Cambridge CB10 1SA, UK. Electronic address: cts@sanger.ac.uk.

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Whole-genome and whole-exome sequence data from large numbers of individuals reveal that we all carry many variants predicted to inactivate genes (knockouts). This discovery raises questions about the phenotypic consequences of these knockouts and potentially allows us to study human gene function through the investigation of homozygous loss-of-function carriers. Here, we discuss strategies, recent results, and future prospects for large-scale human knockout studies. We examine their relevance to studying gene function, population genetics, and importantly, the implications for accurate clinical interpretations.

Indexed as

Gene SilencingGenetic Association StudiesGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseHeterozygotePhenotypeComputational BiologyGenetics, PopulationGenetic TestingGenome, HumanGenome-Wide Association StudyHumansSelection, Geneticclinical interpretationgene functionloss-of-function variants

Identifiers

PMID26988438
PMCPMC4826344

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.