Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31422478›Full record

ReviewHuman genetics2019

Looking to the future of zebrafish as a model to understand the genetic basis of eye disease.

Florencia Cavodeassi, Stephen W Wilson

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Human genetics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Animal Models in Eye Research: Focus on Corneal Pathologies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  4. An Overview towards Zebrafish Larvae as a Model for Ocular Diseases.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. The BDNF/TrkB Neurotrophin System in the Sensory Organs of Zebrafish.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  8. NullInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2021
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
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

2 authors.

Florencia CavodeassiInstitute of Medical and Biomedical Education, St. George's, University of London, Cranmer Terrace, London, SW17 0RE, UK. fcavodea@sgul.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4609-6258
Stephen W WilsonDepartment of Cell and Developmental Biology, Biosciences, UCL, Gower St, London, WC1E 6BT, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8557-5940

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/H008462/1Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/H012516/1Medical Research Council G0401126Medical Research Council G0501487Medical Research Council G0900994Medical Research Council MR/L003775/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this brief commentary, we provide some of our thoughts and opinions on the current and future use of zebrafish to model human eye disease, dissect pathological progression and advance in our understanding of the genetic bases of microphthalmia, andophthalmia and coloboma (MAC) in humans. We provide some background on eye formation in fish and conservation and divergence across vertebrates in this process, discuss different approaches for manipulating gene function and speculate on future research areas where we think research using fish may prove to be particularly effective.

Indexed as

AnimalsColobomaEye DiseasesHumansMicrophthalmosZebrafish

Identifiers

PMID31422478
PMCPMC6710215

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.