Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39591213›Full record

ReviewToxins2024

Current Technologies in Snake Venom Analysis and Applications.

Henrique Roman-Ramos, Paulo Lee Ho

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Toxins, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Computational Strategies for Broad Spectrum Venom Phospholipase AJournal of chemical information and modeling · 2025
    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.

Henrique Roman-RamosLaboratório de Biotecnologia, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Medicina, Universidade Nove de Julho (UNINOVE), São Paulo 01504-001, SP, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-4327-842X
Paulo Lee HoCentro Bioindustrial, Instituto Butantan, São Paulo 05503-900, SP, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-3652-241X

Funding

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo 2017/18398-1National Council for Scientific and Technological Development 309741/2023-8
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This comprehensive review explores the cutting-edge advancements in snake venom research, focusing on the integration of proteomics, genomics, transcriptomics, and bioinformatics. Highlighting the transformative impact of these technologies, the review delves into the genetic and ecological factors driving venom evolution, the complex molecular composition of venoms, and the regulatory mechanisms underlying toxin production. The application of synthetic biology and multi-omics approaches, collectively known as venomics, has revolutionized the field, providing deeper insights into venom function and its therapeutic potential. Despite significant progress, challenges such as the functional characterization of toxins and the development of cost-effective antivenoms remain. This review also discusses the future directions of venom research, emphasizing the need for interdisciplinary collaborations and new technologies (mRNAs, cryo-electron microscopy for structural determinations of toxin complexes, synthetic biology, and other technologies) to fully harness the biomedical potential of venoms and toxins from snakes and other animals.

Indexed as

ProteomicsSnake VenomsAnimalsComputational BiologyGenomicsHumansSnakesSnake VenomsantivenombioinformaticsgenomicsmRNAsproteomicssnake venomsynthetic biologytherapeutic potentialtoxin evolutiontranscriptomicsvenomics

Identifiers

PMID39591213
PMCPMC11598588

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.