Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32998303›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2020

Drawing on the Past to Shape the Future of Synthetic Yeast Research.

Thomas A Dixon, Isak S Pretorius

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
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.

Thomas A DixonDepartment of Modern History, Politics and International Relations, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW 2109, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-4746-2301
Isak S PretoriusChancellery and ARC Centre of Excellence in Synthetic Biology, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW 2109, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9127-3175

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Some years inspire more hindsight reflection and future-gazing than others. This is even more so in 2020 with its evocation of perfect vision and the landmark ring to it. However, no futurist can reliably predict what the world will look like the next time that a year's first two digits will match the second two digits-a numerical pattern that only occurs once in a century. As we leap into a new decade, amid uncertainties triggered by unforeseen global events-such as the outbreak of a worldwide pandemic, the accompanying economic hardship, and intensifying geopolitical tensions-it is important to note the blistering pace of 21st century technological developments indicate that while hindsight might be 20/20, foresight is 50/50. The history of science shows us that imaginative ideas, research excellence, and collaborative innovation can, for example, significantly contribute to the economic, cultural, social, and environmental recovery of a post-COVID-19 world. This article reflects on a history of yeast research to indicate the potential that arises from advances in science, and how this can contribute to the ongoing recovery and development of human society. Future breakthroughs in synthetic genomics are likely to unlock new avenues of impactful discoveries and solutions to some of the world's greatest challenges.

Indexed as

Genome, FungalDisease OutbreaksGenetic EngineeringSaccharomyces cerevisiaeSynthetic Biologybiodesignbiodiversitybiofoundryconsilienceengineering biologyfermentationscientific methodsynthetic genomicstimelineyeast

Identifiers

PMID32998303
PMCPMC7583028

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.