Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33276459›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2020

Engineering Bacterial Cellulose by Synthetic Biology.

Amritpal Singh, Kenneth T Walker, Rodrigo Ledesma-Amaro, Tom Ellis

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 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Evolving materials.Nature materials · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

4 authors.

Amritpal SinghImperial College Centre for Synthetic Biology, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK.
Kenneth T WalkerImperial College Centre for Synthetic Biology, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK.
Rodrigo Ledesma-AmaroImperial College Centre for Synthetic Biology, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK.
Tom EllisImperial College Centre for Synthetic Biology, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5392-976X

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/R505808/1Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council 1846146Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council EP/S032215/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Synthetic biology is an advanced form of genetic manipulation that applies the principles of modularity and engineering design to reprogram cells by changing their DNA. Over the last decade, synthetic biology has begun to be applied to bacteria that naturally produce biomaterials, in order to boost material production, change material properties and to add new functionalities to the resulting material. Recent work has used synthetic biology to engineer several

Indexed as

Metabolic EngineeringSynthetic BiologyBacteriaBiocompatible MaterialsCelluloseGenetic EngineeringBiocompatible MaterialsCellulosebacterial cellulosebiomaterialsmetabolic engineeringsynthetic biology

Identifiers

PMID33276459
PMCPMC7730232

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.