Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27381243›Full record

ArticleNature reviews. Molecular cell biology2016

Applying CRISPR-Cas9 tools to identify and characterize transcriptional enhancers.

Rui Lopes, Gozde Korkmaz, Reuven Agami

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Nature reviews. Molecular cell biology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing 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

35 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Enhancer redundancy in development and disease.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2021
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Cis-Regulatory Control of Mammalian Sex Determination.Sexual development : genetics, molecular biology, evolution, endocrinology, embryology, and pathology of sex determination and differentiation · 2021
    Review
  14. A Mutation in theG3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2020
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Perspectives of CRISPR/Cas-mediatedHorticulture research · 2020
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Rui LopesDivision of Biological Stress Response, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Gozde KorkmazDivision of Biological Stress Response, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Reuven AgamiDivision of Biological Stress Response, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The development of the CRISPR-Cas9 system triggered a revolution in the field of genome engineering. Initially, the use of this system was focused on the study of protein-coding genes but, recently, a number of CRISPR-Cas9-based tools have been developed to study non-coding transcriptional regulatory elements. These technological advances offer unprecedented opportunities for elucidating the functions of enhancers in their endogenous context. Here, we discuss the application, current limitations and future development of CRISPR-Cas9 systems to identify and characterize enhancer elements in a high-throughput manner.

Indexed as

CRISPR-Cas SystemsEnhancer Elements, GeneticEpigenesis, GeneticEpigenomicsGene Editing

Identifiers

PMID27381243

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.