Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28736437›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Genetics2017

Dissecting evolution and disease using comparative vertebrate genomics.

Jennifer R S Meadows, Kerstin Lindblad-Toh

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
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 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Whole genome sequencing ofFrontiers in plant science · 2024
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Analysis of theCell genomics · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Evolution of γ chain cytokines: Mechanisms, methods and applications.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2022
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  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

2 authors.

Jennifer R S MeadowsScience for Life Laboratory, Department of Medical Biochemistry and Microbiology, Uppsala University, Box 582, Uppsala 75123, Sweden.
Kerstin Lindblad-TohScience for Life Laboratory, Department of Medical Biochemistry and Microbiology, Uppsala University, Box 582, Uppsala 75123, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With the generation of more than 100 sequenced vertebrate genomes in less than 25 years, the key question arises of how these resources can be used to inform new or ongoing projects. In the past, this diverse collection of sequences from human as well as model and non-model organisms has been used to annotate the human genome and to increase the understanding of human disease. In the future, comparative vertebrate genomics in conjunction with additional genomic resources will yield insights into the processes of genome function, evolution, speciation, selection and adaptation, as well as the quantification of species diversity. In this Review, we discuss how the genomics of non-human organisms can provide insights into vertebrate biology and how this can contribute to the understanding of human physiology and health.

Indexed as

AnimalsGenomicsHumansSequence Analysis, DNAVertebrates

Identifiers

PMID28736437

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.