Correction: Human demographic history has amplified the effects of background selection across the genome.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Overdominance for fitness: a genomic comparison between empirical and simulated data with Drosophila melanogaster.Genetics · 2026
   Article
2. Positive selection on rare variants of IGF1R and BRD4 underlying the cold adaptation of wild boar.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2025
   Article
3. Demographic History and Natural Selection Shape Patterns of Deleterious Mutation Load and Barriers to Introgression across Populus Genome.Molecular biology and evolution · 2022
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Erratum for
  Human demographic history has amplified the effects of background selection across the genome.2018

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract