ReviewFrontiers in physiology2020
Genetic Tools to Study Cardiovascular Biology.
Review in Frontiers in physiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Therapeutic Targets for Pediatric Pulmonary Vein Stenosis: Insights from Animal Models.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Genetic Animal Models of Cardiovascular Pathologies.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Resistance to anti-LAG-3 plus anti-PD-1 therapy in head and neck cancer is mediated by Sox9+ tumor cells interaction with Fpr1+ neutrophils.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Bhlhe40 Regulates Proliferation and Angiogenesis in Mouse Embryoid Bodies under Hypoxia.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Multicolor strategies for investigating clonal expansion and tissue plasticity.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2022Review
- A genome-wide library of MADM mice for single-cell genetic mosaic analysis.Cell reports · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Progress in biomedical science is tightly associated with the improvement of methods and genetic tools to manipulate and analyze gene function in mice, the most widely used model organism in biomedical research. The joint effort of numerous individual laboratories and consortiums has contributed to the creation of a large genetic resource that enables scientists to image cells, probe signaling pathways activities, or modify a gene function in any desired cell type or time point, à la carte. However, as these tools significantly increase in number and become more sophisticated, it is more difficult to keep track of each tool's possibilities and understand their advantages and disadvantages. Knowing the best currently available genetic technology to answer a particular biological question is key to reach a higher standard in biomedical research. In this review, we list and discuss the main advantages and disadvantages of available mammalian genetic technology to analyze cardiovascular cell biology at higher cellular and molecular resolution. We start with the most simple and classical genetic approaches and end with the most advanced technology available to fluorescently label cells, conditionally target their genes, image their clonal expansion, and decode their lineages.
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.