Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29019985›Full record

ReviewNature2017

DNA sequencing at 40: past, present and future.

Jay Shendure, Shankar Balasubramanian, George M Church, Walter Gilbert, Jane Rogers, Jeffery A Schloss, Robert H Waterston

Erratum issuedAbstract readHistorical ArticleReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 419 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
419citing 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

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

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

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Jay ShendureDepartment of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Shankar BalasubramanianDepartment of Chemistry, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
George M ChurchThe Wyss Institute & Department of Genetics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Walter GilbertDepartment of Molecular and Cellular Biology, Harvard University, Cambridge Massachusetts, USA.
Jane RogersInternational Wheat Genome Sequencing Consortium, Little Eversden, Cambridge, UK.
Jeffery A SchlossNational Human Genome Research Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
Robert H WaterstonDepartment of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review commemorates the 40th anniversary of DNA sequencing, a period in which we have already witnessed multiple technological revolutions and a growth in scale from a few kilobases to the first human genome, and now to millions of human and a myriad of other genomes. DNA sequencing has been extensively and creatively repurposed, including as a 'counter' for a vast range of molecular phenomena. We predict that in the long view of history, the impact of DNA sequencing will be on a par with that of the microscope.

Indexed as

Sequence Analysis, DNAAnimalsGenomicsHistory, 20th CenturyHistory, 21st CenturyHumansMetagenomeMicroscopy

Identifiers

PMID29019985

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.