Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28672160›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in virology2017

Origin of the retroviruses: when, where, and how?

Alexander Hayward

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in virology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing 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

47 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Genetic therapies for neurological diseases.Pharmacological reviews · 2026
    Review
  3. Deceiving the gatekeepers: virus modulation of gap junctions.Microbiology and molecular biology reviews : MMBR · 2025
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. The relationship between neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs) and NLRP3 inflammasome.Inflammation research : official journal of the European Histamine Research Society ... [et al.] · 2025
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Nucleic acid-based drugs for patients with solid tumours.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2024
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

1 author.

Alexander HaywardCentre for Ecology and Conservation, University of Exeter, Cornwall Campus, Penryn, TR10 9FE, United Kingdom. Electronic address: alex.hayward@exeter.ac.uk.

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/N020146/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Retroviruses are a virus family of considerable medical and veterinary importance. Additionally, it is now clear that endogenous retroviruses (ERVs) comprise significant portions of vertebrate genomes. Until recently, very little was known about the deep evolutionary origins of retroviruses. However, advances in genomics and bioinformatics have opened the way for great strides in understanding. Recent research employing a wide variety of bioinformatic approaches has demonstrated that retroviruses evolved during the early Palaeozoic Era, between 460 and 550 million years ago, providing the oldest inferred date estimate for any virus group. This finding presents an important framework to investigate the evolutionary transitions that led to the emergence of the retroviruses, offering potential insights into the infectious origins of a major group of pathogenic viruses.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularVirus IntegrationAnimalsComputational BiologyEndogenous RetrovirusesGenomicsHumansMicePhylogenyPrimatesProvirusesRecombination, Genetic

Identifiers

PMID28672160
PMCPMC5962544

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.