ArticleNature2017
Erratum: Genome editing reveals a role for OCT4 in human embryogenesis.
Article in Nature, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of guide-free Cas9-induced genomic damage and transcriptome changes in pig embryos.Molecular therapy. Nucleic acids · 2023Article
- Validation of barley 2OGO gene as a functional orthologue of Arabidopsis DMR6 gene in Fusarium head blight susceptibility.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- On the confluence of reproductive and regenerative medicines.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum for
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This corrects the article DOI: 10.1038/nature24033.
Identifiers
28976971What 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.