ReviewCurrent genetics2018
Scarless genome editing: progress towards understanding genotype-phenotype relationships.
Review in Current genetics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bioengineering Interventions to Enhance the Capacity of the Gut Microbiota in Controlling Food Allergies.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Integrating natural language processing and genome analysis enables accurate bacterial phenotype prediction.NAR genomics and bioinformatics · 2025Article
- Bacterial genome engineering using CRISPR-associated transposases.Nature protocols · 2024Review
- Bacterial genome engineering using CRISPR RNA-guided transposases.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023Article
- CRISPR-Cas13 in malaria parasite: Diagnosis and prospective gene function identification.Frontiers in microbiology · 2023Review
- A glance at genome editing with CRISPR-Cas9 technology.Current genetics · 2020Review
- Yeast genetic interaction screens in the age of CRISPR/Cas.Current genetics · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The ability to predict phenotype from genotype has been an elusive goal for the biological sciences for several decades. Progress decoding genotype-phenotype relationships has been hampered by the challenge of introducing precise genetic changes to specific genomic locations. Here we provide a comparative review of the major techniques that have been historically used to make genetic changes in cells as well as the development of the CRISPR technology which enabled the ability to make marker-free disruptions in endogenous genomic locations. We also discuss how the achievement of truly scarless genome editing has required further adjustments of the original CRISPR method. We conclude by examining recently developed genome editing methods which are not reliant on the induction of a DNA double strand break and discuss the future of both genome engineering and the study of genotype-phenotype relationships.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.