Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37538801›Full record

ArticleActa naturae

CRISPR/Cas9 Essential Gene Editing in Drosophila.

I S Osadchiy, S O Kamalyan, K Y Tumashova, P G Georgiev, O G Maksimenko

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Acta naturae. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 36% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Peculiarities of theInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

I S OsadchiyInstitute of Gene Biology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, 119334 Russian Federation.
S O KamalyanInstitute of Gene Biology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, 119334 Russian Federation.
K Y TumashovaInstitute of Gene Biology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, 119334 Russian Federation.
P G GeorgievInstitute of Gene Biology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, 119334 Russian Federation.
O G MaksimenkoInstitute of Gene Biology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, 119334 Russian Federation.
Institute of Gene Biology · RU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Since the addition of the CRISPR/Cas9 technology to the genetic engineering toolbox, the problems of low efficiency and off-target effects hamper its widespread use in all fields of life sciences. Furthermore, essential gene knockout usually results in failure and it is often not obvious whether the gene of interest is an essential one. Here, we report on a new strategy to improve the CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing, which is based on the idea that editing efficiency is tightly linked to how essential the gene to be modified is. The more essential the gene, the less the efficiency of the editing and the larger the number of off-targets, due to the survivorship bias. Considering this, we generated deletions of three essential genes in

Indexed as

CRISPR/Cas9essential gene editinggenome editinghousekeeping genes

Identifiers

PMID37538801
PMCPMC10395781
OpenAlexW4385555496

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.