Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33123803›Full record

ReviewJournal, genetic engineering & biotechnology2020

The genome editing revolution: review.

Ahmad M Khalil

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal, genetic engineering & biotechnology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 94 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
94citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

94 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. The past, present, and future of artificial zinc finger proteins: design strategies and chemical and biological applications.Journal of biological inorganic chemistry : JBIC : a publication of the Society of Biological Inorganic Chemistry · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Establishment of CRISPR/Cas9 Genome Editing inJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Engineered microorganisms for environmental release: current situation and future perspectives.International microbiology : the official journal of the Spanish Society for Microbiology · 2026
    Article
  5. Advances in Fish Gene Editing.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Scarless Genetic Engineering ofJournal of microbiology and biotechnology · 2025
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review

34 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

1 author.

Ahmad M KhalilDepartment of Biological Sciences, Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan. kahmad76@yahoo.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1081-7300

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDevelopment of efficient strategies has always been one of the great perspectives for biotechnologists. During the last decade, genome editing of different organisms has been a fast advancing field and therefore has received a lot of attention from various researchers comprehensively reviewing latest achievements and offering opinions on future directions. This review presents a brief history, basic principles, advantages and disadvantages, as well as various aspects of each genome editing technology including the modes, applications, and challenges that face delivery of gene editing components. MAIN BODY: Genetic modification techniques cover a wide range of studies, including the generation of transgenic animals, functional analysis of genes, model development for diseases, or drug development. The delivery of certain proteins such as monoclonal antibodies, enzymes, and growth hormones has been suffering from several obstacles because of their large size. These difficulties encouraged scientists to explore alternative approaches, leading to the progress in gene editing. The distinguished efforts and enormous experimentation have now been able to introduce methodologies that can change the genetic constitution of the living cell. The genome editing strategies have evolved during the last three decades, and nowadays, four types of "programmable" nucleases are available in this field: meganucleases, zinc finger nucleases, transcription activator-like effector nucleases, and the clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR)/CRISPR associated protein 9 (Cas9) (CRISPR/Cas-9) system. Each group has its own characteristics necessary for researchers to select the most suitable method for gene editing tool for a range of applications. Genome engineering/editing technology will revolutionize the creation of precisely manipulated genomes of cells or organisms in order to modify a specific characteristic. Of the potential applications are those in human health and agriculture. Introducing constructs into target cells or organisms is the key step in genome engineering.

conclusionsDespite the success already achieved, the genome editing techniques are still suffering certain difficulties. Challenges must be overcome before the full potential of genome editing can be realized.

Indexed as

CRISPR-Cas systemGene editingGene therapyGenome editingMeganucleasesTALENZFN

Identifiers

PMID33123803
PMCPMC7596157

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.