ReviewTherapeutic advances in ophthalmology
RNA-sequencing in ophthalmology research: considerations for experimental design and analysis.
Review in Therapeutic advances in ophthalmology. 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.
- Artificial Intelligence in Ocular Transcriptomics: Applications of Unsupervised and Supervised Learning.Cells · 2025Review
- Single-cell transcriptomics of the ocular anterior segment: a comprehensive review.Eye (London, England) · 2023Review
- Quantitative systems pharmacology of the eye: Tools and data for ocular QSP.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2023Review
- Gene Expression Data for Investigating Glaucoma Treatment Options and Pharmacology in the Anterior Segment, State-of-the-Art and Future Directions.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Review
- Oxidative Stress and the Role of NADPH Oxidase in Glaucoma.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Review
- Omics analyses in keratoconus: from transcriptomics to proteomics.Current ophthalmology reports · 2020Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
High-throughput, massively parallel sequence analysis has revolutionized the way that researchers design and execute scientific investigations. Vast amounts of sequence data can be generated in short periods of time. Regarding ophthalmology and vision research, extensive interrogation of patient samples for underlying causative DNA mutations has resulted in the discovery of many new genes relevant to eye disease. However, such analysis remains functionally limited. RNA-sequencing accurately snapshots thousands of genes, capturing many subtypes of RNA molecules, and has become the gold standard for transcriptome gene expression quantification. RNA-sequencing has the potential to advance our understanding of eye development and disease; it can reveal new candidates to improve our molecular diagnosis rates and highlight therapeutic targets for intervention. But with a wide range of applications, the design of such experiments can be problematic, no single optimal pipeline exists, and therefore, several considerations must be undertaken for optimal study design. We review the key steps involved in RNA-sequencing experimental design and the downstream bioinformatic pipelines used for differential gene expression. We provide guidance on the application of RNA-sequencing to ophthalmology and sources of open-access eye-related data sets.
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.