Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31395057›Full record

ReviewBMC biology2019

Synthetic Biology Goes Cell-Free.

Aidan Tinafar, Katariina Jaenes, Keith Pardee

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC biology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 61 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
61citing 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

61 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Gene circuit-based sensors.Fundamental research · 2025
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Applications of cell free protein synthesis in protein design.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2024
    Review
  20. Review

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

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

3 authors.

Aidan TinafarLeslie Dan Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Toronto, 144 College St., Toronto, ON, M5S 3M2, Canada.
Katariina JaenesLeslie Dan Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Toronto, 144 College St., Toronto, ON, M5S 3M2, Canada.
Keith PardeeLeslie Dan Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Toronto, 144 College St., Toronto, ON, M5S 3M2, Canada. keith.pardee@utoronto.ca.

Funding

CIHR 149783CIHR 201610FDN-375469CIHR 950-231075
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cell-free systems (CFS) have recently evolved into key platforms for synthetic biology applications. Many synthetic biology tools have traditionally relied on cell-based systems, and while their adoption has shown great progress, the constraints inherent to the use of cellular hosts have limited their reach and scope. Cell-free systems, which can be thought of as programmable liquids, have removed many of these complexities and have brought about exciting opportunities for rational design and manipulation of biological systems. Here we review how these simple and accessible enzymatic systems are poised to accelerate the rate of advancement in synthetic biology and, more broadly, biotechnology.

Indexed as

Cell-Free SystemBiotechnologySynthetic Biology

Identifiers

PMID31395057
PMCPMC6688370

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.