Evidence map›Paper›PMID 7635304›Full record

ArticleGenetics1995

Inversions with deletions and duplications.

A J Gordon, J A Halliday

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genetics, 1995. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

A J GordonSection de Biologie, Institut Curie, Paris, France.
J A Halliday
Institut Curie · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Complex mutational events, including de novo inversion with deletion and duplication of sequence, have been observed but are difficult to model. We propose that nascent leading-strand misalignment upon the lagging-strand template during DNA replication can result in the inversion of sequence. The positioning of this misalignment and of the realignment of the leading strand back into the leading-strand template will determine if the inversion is accompanied by deletion and duplication of sequence. We suggest that such strand misalignment-realignment events may occur at the replication fork during concurrent DNA replication.

Indexed as

Chromosome InversionGene DeletionModels, GeneticMultigene FamilyBase SequenceDNA, BacterialDNA ReplicationDNA, Single-StrandedEscherichia coliMolecular Sequence DataMutationSequence Homology, Nucleic AcidTemplates, GeneticDNA, BacterialDNA, Single-Stranded

Identifiers

PMID7635304
PMCPMC1206566
OpenAlexW2139473578

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.