ArticleDevelopment (Cambridge, England)2025
A case for broadening our view of mechanism in developmental biology.
Article in Development (Cambridge, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Biology Needs Philosophy, But What Philosophy?Bioscience · 2026Review
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
Abstract
Developmental biologists can perform studies that describe a phenomenon (descriptive work) and/or explain how the phenomenon works (mechanistic work). There is a prevalent perception that molecular/genetic explanations achieved via perturbations of gene function are the primary means of advancing mechanistic knowledge. We believe this to be a limited perspective, one that does not effectively represent the breadth of work in our field. We surveyed a representative and diverse group of colleagues to share their views on what it takes to infer mechanism. Here, we briefly examine the factors that have shaped the dominant view of mechanism, summarize responses to the survey, present our views, and suggest a path forward that embraces a broad outlook on the diversity of studies that advance knowledge in our field.
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.