ArticlemSphere2024
The Epistemic Value of Gain of Function Experiments.
Article in mSphere, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dual use and gain-of-function research: a significant endeavor with biosecurity imperatives.mSphere · 2025Article
- Evolution, New Concepts, and Institutional Adaptation to the 2024 Dual-Use Research of Concern and Pathogens with Enhanced Pandemic Potential Policy.Applied biosafety : journal of the American Biological Safety Association · 2025Article
- The Janus Face of Oxidative Stress and Hydrogen Sulfide: Insights into Neurodegenerative Disease Pathogenesis.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- CRISPR activation: identifying and using novel genes for plant disease resistance breeding.Frontiers in genome editing · 2025Review
- Public role in research oversight.Journal of virology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The phrase "gain of function" (GOF) has recently acquired a negative connotation in experimental biology by its association with risky science. Whereas much of the discussion on the relative merits of GOF-type experiments has focused on their risk-benefit equation, relatively little has been said about their epistemic value. In this article, we recount how GOF experiments were critical for establishing DNA as the genetic material, the identification of cellular receptors, and the role of oncogenes in cancer research. Today, many of the products of the biomedical revolution such as synthetic insulin, growth factors, and monoclonal antibodies are the result of GOF experiments where cells were given the new function of synthesizing medically important products. GOF experiments and complementary loss of function experiments are epistemically powerful tools for establishing causality in biology.
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.