Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27932948›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in molecular neuroscience2016

RNA Editing-Systemic Relevance and Clue to Disease Mechanisms?

Jochen C Meier, Svenja Kankowski, Heinz Krestel, Florian Hetsch

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in molecular neuroscience, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. NFrontiers in plant science · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. The epitranscriptome and synaptic plasticity.Current opinion in neurobiology · 2019
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Frontiers in genetics · 2019
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. RNA Editing and Retrotransposons in Neurology.Frontiers in molecular neuroscience · 2018
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

4 authors.

Jochen C MeierCell Physiology, Technische Universität Braunschweig Braunschweig, Germany.
Svenja KankowskiCell Physiology, Technische Universität Braunschweig Braunschweig, Germany.
Heinz KrestelNeurology, Universitätsspital und Universität Bern Bern, Switzerland.
Florian HetschCell Physiology, Technische Universität Braunschweig Braunschweig, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent advances in sequencing technologies led to the identification of a plethora of different genes and several hundreds of amino acid recoding edited positions. Changes in editing rates of some of these positions were associated with diseases such as atherosclerosis, myopathy, epilepsy, major depression disorder, schizophrenia and other mental disorders as well as cancer and brain tumors. This review article summarizes our current knowledge on that front and presents glycine receptor C-to-U RNA editing as a first example of disease-associated increased RNA editing that includes assessment of disease mechanisms of the corresponding gene product in an animal model.

Indexed as

cancerepilepsyglutamate receptorglycine receptormental disorderspotassium channelsRNA editingserotonin

Identifiers

PMID27932948
PMCPMC5120146

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.