ReviewMolecular reproduction and development2016
How computational models contribute to our understanding of the germ line.
Review in Molecular reproduction and development, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Modeling the C. elegans germline stem cell genetic network using automated reasoning.Bio Systems · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Computational models are an invaluable tool in modern biology. They provide a framework within which to summarize existing knowledge, enable competing hypotheses to be compared qualitatively and quantitatively, and to facilitate the interpretation of complex data. Moreover, models allow questions to be investigated that are difficult to approach experimentally. Theories can be tested in context, identifying the gaps in our understanding and potentially leading to new hypotheses. Models can be developed on a variety of scales and with different levels of mechanistic detail, depending on the available data, the biological questions of interest, and the available mathematical and computational tools. The goal of this review is to provide a broad picture of how modeling has been applied to reproductive biology. Specifically, we look at four uses of modeling: (i) comparing hypotheses; (ii) interpreting data; (iii) exploring experimentally challenging questions; and (iv) hypothesis evaluation and generation. We present examples of each of these applications in reproductive biology, drawing from a range of organisms-including Drosophila, Caenorhabditis elegans, mouse, and humans. We aim to describe the data and techniques used to construct each model, and to highlight the benefits of modeling to the field, as complementary to experimental work. Mol. Reprod. Dev. 83: 944-957, 2016 © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Indexed as
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.