ArticleAmerican journal of human genetics2021
The risks of using unapproved gene symbols.
Article in American journal of human genetics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Genenames.org: the HGNC and PGNC resources in 2026.Nucleic acids research · 2026Article
- Towards an official gene nomenclature for Populus trichocarpa.Tree physiology · 2025Review
- Evaluating Ovarian Cancer Chemotherapy Response Using Gene Expression Data and Machine Learning.BioMedInformatics · 2024Article
- Article
- Genenames.org: the HGNC resources in 2023.Nucleic acids research · 2023Article
- The bridge-like lipid transfer protein (BLTP) gene group: introducing new nomenclature based on structural homology indicating shared function.Human genomics · 2022Review
- The importance of being the HGNC.Human genomics · 2022Review
- Article
- Comment on Herring et al. The Use of "Retardation" in FRAXA, FMRP, FMR1 and Other Designations.Cells · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The use of approved nomenclature in publications is vital to enable effective scientific communication and is particularly crucial when discussing genes of clinical relevance. Here, we discuss several examples of cases where the failure of researchers to use a HUGO Gene Nomenclature Committee (HGNC)-approved symbol in publications has led to confusion between unrelated human genes in the literature. We also inform authors of the steps they can take to ensure that they use approved nomenclature in their manuscripts and discuss how referencing HGNC IDs can remove ambiguity when referring to genes that have previously been published with confusing alias symbols.
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.