Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28392571›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Genetics2017

Scaling by shrinking: empowering single-cell 'omics' with microfluidic devices.

Sanjay M Prakadan, Alex K Shalek, David A Weitz

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Genetics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 155 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
155citing 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

155 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. High-sensitivity, protein-independent detection of dsDNA sequences.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. DNA storage: The future direction for medical cold data storage.Synthetic and systems biotechnology · 2025
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Progress of single-cell sequencing technology in immunotherapy for tuberculosis.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Single-cell mNature neuroscience · 2024
    Article

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

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.

Sanjay M PrakadanInstitute for Medical Engineering &Science (IMES) and Department of Chemistry, MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, USA.
Alex K ShalekInstitute for Medical Engineering &Science (IMES) and Department of Chemistry, MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, USA.
David A WeitzSchool of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138, USA.

Funding

Structural basis of the specific protein-protein interactions underlying IF assemP01GM096971 · NIGMS · NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY AT CHICAGO · PI DANUSER, GAUDENZ, GELFAND, VLADIMIR I · 2011 to 2021
$16.8M
Center for Cell CircuitsP50HG006193 · NHGRI · BROAD INSTITUTE, INC. · PI REGEV, AVIV · 2011 to 2015
$15.6M
Center for Cell CircuitsRM1HG006193 · NHGRI · BROAD INSTITUTE, INC. · PI BLAINEY, PAUL CLARK, HACOHEN, NIR · 2016 to 2020
$14.9M
Physics of collective cellular migration in lung health and diseaseP01HL120839 · NHLBI · HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH · PI FREDBERG, JEFFREY J · 2014 to 2018
$12.2M
Building the Hematopoietic Stem Cell NicheR01EB014703 · NIBIB · HARVARD UNIVERSITY · PI MOONEY, DAVID J, SCADDEN, DAVID T · 2011 to 2014
$3.1M
"Bottom - Up" Profiling of Interacting Cellular SystemsDP2GM119419 · NIGMS · MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI SHALEK, ALEX K · 2015 to 2015
$2.3M
An integrated multiplexed genomic assay for low input clinical samples1U24AI118672 · NIAID · BROAD INSTITUTE, INC. · PI SHALEK, ALEX K · 2015 to 2019
$2.0M
NHGRI NIH HHS P50 HG006193NHGRI NIH HHS RM1 HG006193NHLBI NIH HHS P01 HL120839NIAID NIH HHS U24 AI118672NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB014703NIGMS NIH HHS DP2 GM119419NIGMS NIH HHS P01 GM096971
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent advances in cellular profiling have demonstrated substantial heterogeneity in the behaviour of cells once deemed 'identical', challenging fundamental notions of cell 'type' and 'state'. Not surprisingly, these findings have elicited substantial interest in deeply characterizing the diversity, interrelationships and plasticity among cellular phenotypes. To explore these questions, experimental platforms are needed that can extensively and controllably profile many individual cells. Here, microfluidic structures - whether valve-, droplet- or nanowell-based - have an important role because they can facilitate easy capture and processing of single cells and their components, reducing labour and costs relative to conventional plate-based methods while also improving consistency. In this article, we review the current state-of-the-art methodologies with respect to microfluidics for mammalian single-cell 'omics' and discuss challenges and future opportunities.

Indexed as

AnimalsGenomicsHumansMicrofluidicsSingle-Cell Analysis

Identifiers

PMID28392571
PMCPMC5495114

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.