Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27153285›Full record

ReviewNature biotechnology2016

Three decades of nanopore sequencing.

David Deamer, Mark Akeson, Daniel Branton

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nature biotechnology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 532 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
532citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

532 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Systematic Review: Long-Read Sequencing in Algal Studies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Nanopore Sequencing for Chikungunya Virus: Principles and Application.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2027
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. De novo design of semisynthetic conduction pores.Nature structural & molecular biology · 2026
    Article
  10. Review
  11. The Ion Permeability of DNA Nanotube Channels.Small (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany) · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

472 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

David DeamerDepartment of Biomolecular Engineering, University of California, Santa Cruz, California, USA.
Mark AkesonDepartment of Biomolecular Engineering, University of California, Santa Cruz, California, USA.
Daniel BrantonDepartment of Molecular &Cellular Biology, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.

Funding

Electronic Sequencing in NanoporesR01HG003703 · NHGRI · HARVARD UNIVERSITY · PI BRANTON, DANIEL NONE, GOLOVCHENKO, JENE A · 2005 to 2014
$16.1M
Optimization of Processive Enzymes for DNA Sequencing using NanoporesR01HG006321 · NHGRI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SANTA CRUZ · PI AKESON, MARK A · 2011 to 2013
$3.6M
Optimization of Nanopore Genomic DNA SequencingR01HG007827 · NHGRI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SANTA CRUZ · PI AKESON, MARK A · 2014 to 2016
$2.2M
NHGRI NIH HHS R01 HG003703NHGRI NIH HHS R01 HG006321NHGRI NIH HHS R01 HG007827
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as

ConductometryDNAHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingLipid BilayersNanoporesSequence Analysis, DNADNALipid Bilayers

Identifiers

PMID27153285
PMCPMC6733523

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.