Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41716991›Full record

ReviewiScience2026

Following the central dogma: Nanopore sequencing from DNA and RNA to proteins.

Yutong Wang, Qian Han, Yilong He, Shumin Deng, Ziwei Huang, Ziyan Zhang, Shuaijian Dai, Zhuxin Dong

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in iScience, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

8 authors.

Yutong WangDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan 410013, China.
Qian HanDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan 410013, China.
Yilong HeDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan 410013, China.
Shumin DengDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan 410013, China.
Ziwei HuangDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan 410013, China.
Ziyan ZhangDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan 410013, China.
Shuaijian DaiDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan 410013, China.
Zhuxin DongDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan 410013, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The first nanopore-based sequencer was launched in 2014, and subsequently, nanopore played an irreplaceable role in disclosing the first complete, gapless sequence of a human genome in 2022 due to its megabase-scale read lengths. However, a striking revelation from DNA sequencing is that over 95% of human DNA does not specify a protein, which means tremendous proteomic information cannot be predicted from the genome. Therefore, nanopore researchers have been leaning increasing attention to the proteome. Nowadays, nanopores have demonstrated unprecedented performance in discriminating individual proteinogenic amino acids with chemical modifications. Meanwhile, diverse strategies for full-length proteins to translocate through nanopores have been developed. Undoubtedly, nanopore will sooner or later facilitate

Indexed as

Methodology in biological sciencesSequence analysisTechniques in genetics

Identifiers

PMID41716991
PMCPMC12914296

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.