Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33287895›Full record

ArticleMilitary Medical Research2020

CRISPR/Cas9 from bench to bedside: what clinicians need to know before application?

Zi-Qing Li, Chao-Hong Li

Abstract readLetter
In one paragraph

Article in Military Medical Research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Recent advances in diagnostic technologies for postoperative central nervous system infections: a review.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2025
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

2 authors.

Zi-Qing LiDepartment of Joint Surgery, Shandong Provincial Hospital Affiliated to Shandong First Medical University, Jinan, 250021, China. ziqingli@upenn.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-3596-3520
Chao-Hong LiDepartment of Histology and Embryology, Zhongshan School of Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, 510080, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In October 2020, Dr. Emmanuelle Charpentier and Dr. Jennifer Doudna won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry for their pioneering work in precise genome editing using the CRISPR technology. Although CRISPR technology has developed rapidly in the last decade, there are still many uncertainties before eventual use in clinical settings. In this mini review, we summarize the current efforts in addressing the limitations of CRISPR technology and future directions.

Indexed as

CRISPR-Cas SystemsHumansPoint-of-Care SystemsCRISPR/Cas9Ethical concernsGenome editingNobel prizeOff-target effect

Identifiers

PMID33287895
PMCPMC7722470

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.