ReviewSexual development : genetics, molecular biology, evolution, endocrinology, embryology, and pathology of sex determination and differentiation2017
Leveraging Online Resources to Prioritize Candidate Genes for Functional Analyses: Using the Fetal Testis as a Test Case.
Review in Sexual development : genetics, molecular biology, evolution, endocrinology, embryology, and pathology of sex determination and differentiation, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The genetics of obstructive sleep apnoea.Respirology (Carlton, Vic.) · 2018Review
- A genomic atlas of human adrenal and gonad development.Wellcome open research · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
With each new microarray or RNA-seq experiment, massive quantities of transcriptomic information are generated with the purpose to produce a list of candidate genes for functional analyses. Yet an effective strategy remains elusive to prioritize the genes on these candidate lists. In this review, we outline a prioritizing strategy by taking a step back from the bench and leveraging the rich range of public databases. This in silico approach provides an economical, less biased, and more effective solution. We discuss the publicly available online resources that can be used to answer a range of questions about a gene. Is the gene of interest expressed in the system of interest (using expression databases)? Where else is this gene expressed (using added-value transcriptomic resources)? What pathways and processes is the gene involved in (using enriched gene pathway analysis and mouse knockout databases)? Is this gene correlated with human diseases (using human disease variant databases)? Using mouse fetal testis as an example, our strategies identified 298 genes annotated as expressed in the fetal testis. We cross-referenced these genes to existing microarray data and narrowed the list down to cell-type-specific candidates (35 for Sertoli cells, 11 for Leydig cells, and 25 for germ cells). Our strategies can be customized so that they allow researchers to effectively and confidently prioritize genes for functional analysis.
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.