Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32441252›Full record

ArticleeLife2020

Parallel CRISPR-Cas9 screens clarify impacts of p53 on screen performance.

Anne Ramsay Bowden, David A Morales-Juarez, Matylda Sczaniecka-Clift, Maria Martin Agudo, Natalia Lukashchuk, John Christopher Thomas, Stephen P Jackson

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in eLife, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

40 citing papers in PubMed, 62 citations in OpenAlex.

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

7 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Anne Ramsay Bowden *Wellcome/Cancer Research UK Gurdon Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-1138-4452
David A Morales-Juarez *Wellcome/Cancer Research UK Gurdon Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-5370-5512
Matylda Sczaniecka-CliftWellcome/Cancer Research UK Gurdon Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Maria Martin AgudoWellcome/Cancer Research UK Gurdon Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-3605-9963
Natalia LukashchukWellcome/Cancer Research UK Gurdon Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
John Christopher ThomasWellcome/Cancer Research UK Gurdon Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-2425-8412
Stephen P JacksonWellcome/Cancer Research UK Gurdon Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-9317-7937
University of Cambridge · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK 11224Cancer Research UK 18796Cancer Research UK C6946/A24843Cancer Research UK C6/A11224Cancer Research UK C6/A18796
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

CRISPR-Cas9 genome engineering has revolutionised high-throughput functional genomic screens. However, recent work has raised concerns regarding the performance of CRISPR-Cas9 screens using

Indexed as

CRISPR-Cas SystemsApoptosisCell LineDNA DamageEpithelial CellsGene DeletionGene EditingGene Expression RegulationHumansTumor Suppressor Protein p53TP53 protein, humanTumor Suppressor Protein p53CRISPR screeningDNA damage responsegeneticsgenomicshumanTP53

Identifiers

PMID32441252
PMCPMC7244323
OpenAlexW3027357380

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.