Evidence map›Paper›PMID 8693848›Full record

ArticleActa biotheoretica1996

In vivo interpretation of in vitro effect studies with a detailed analysis of the method of in vitro transcription in isolated cell nuclei.

R Strand, R Fjelland, T Flatmark

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Acta biotheoretica, 1996. 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. Intervention and experiment.European journal for philosophy of science · 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

3 authors.

R StrandDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of Bergen, Norway.
R Fjelland
T Flatmark

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In vitro experimental approaches are of central importance to contemporary molecular and cellular biology and toxicology. However, the scientific value or impact of in vitro results depends on their relevance in vivo. In vitro effect studies address inobservable in vivo phenomena through experiments on analogous in vitro phenomena. We present a theoretical basis developed to evaluate the in vivo relevance of in vitro effect studies. As a case study, the procedure for measuring specific gene transcription in isolated cell nuclei (¿nuclear run-off method¿) is analyzed. It is concluded that current evidence fails to justify in vivo interpretations of nuclear run-off experiments within the framework of theoretical models of transcription, implying that quantitative in vivo interpretations are unwarranted. Qualitative interpretations of nuclear run-off experiments may be justified by inferring ¿the best explanation¿, especially when significant in vitro effects follow in vivo perturbations. Elements of a general theory are proposed. It is concluded that quantitative in vivo interpretations are warranted primarily in biochemical quantitation of biomolecules, while studies on biological function should be interpreted qualitatively in terms of causal explanations. Inferences to the best explanations are strengthened through additional evidence and the creation of experimental differences (effects).

Indexed as

Models, GeneticAnimalsAntisense Elements (Genetics)Cell NucleusChromosome AberrationsDNA, ComplementaryGene Expression RegulationGenes, RegulatorIn Vitro TechniquesLogicRNA, MessengerRNA, NuclearTranscription, GeneticAntisense Elements (Genetics)DNA, ComplementaryRNA, MessengerRNA, Nuclear

Identifiers

PMID8693848

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.