Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28752365›Full record

ReviewBiophysical reviews2017

Alternative reagents to antibodies in imaging applications.

R Bedford, C Tiede, R Hughes, A Curd, M J McPherson, Michelle Peckham, Darren C Tomlinson

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biophysical reviews, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

7 authors.

R BedfordSchool of Molecular and Cellular Biology, Astbury Centre for Structural and Molecular Biology, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
C TiedeSchool of Molecular and Cellular Biology, Astbury Centre for Structural and Molecular Biology, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
R HughesSchool of Molecular and Cellular Biology, Astbury Centre for Structural and Molecular Biology, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
A CurdSchool of Molecular and Cellular Biology, Astbury Centre for Structural and Molecular Biology, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
M J McPhersonSchool of Molecular and Cellular Biology, Astbury Centre for Structural and Molecular Biology, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Michelle PeckhamSchool of Molecular and Cellular Biology, Astbury Centre for Structural and Molecular Biology, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK. m.peckham@leeds.ac.uk.
Darren C TomlinsonSchool of Molecular and Cellular Biology, Astbury Centre for Structural and Molecular Biology, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK. d.c.tomlinson@leeds.ac.uk.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/K015613/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Antibodies have been indispensable tools in molecular biology, biochemistry and medical research. However, a number of issues surrounding validation, specificity and batch variation of commercially available antibodies have prompted research groups to develop novel non-antibody binding reagents. The ability to select highly specific monoclonal non-antibody binding proteins without the need for animals, the ease of production and the ability to site-directly label has enabled a wide variety of applications to be tested, including imaging. In this review, we discuss the success of a number of non-antibody reagents in imaging applications, including the recently reported Affimer.

Indexed as

AdhironAffimerDARPinImagingMonobodySuper-resolution

Identifiers

PMID28752365
PMCPMC5578921

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.