ArticleMethods and protocols2025
Comparative Analysis of Methods for Assessing On-Target Gene Editing Efficiencies.
Article in Methods and protocols, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
- Improvement of chicken genome editing efficiency in vitro using ribonucleoprotein-mediated CRISPR/Cas9 delivery.Journal of animal science and biotechnology · 2026Article
- Self-Assembling Short Peptide Carriers for Gene Delivery.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Anti-cancer compound screening identifies Aurora Kinase A inhibition as a means to favor CRISPR/Cas9 gene correction over knock-out.PloS one · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Genome editing based on CRISPR-derived technologies has become a cornerstone in both fundamental research and clinical applications. Accurately measuring editing efficiency is crucial for developing and applying genome editing strategies. This study offers a detailed comparison of widely used techniques for evaluating on-target gene editing efficiency, including T7 Endonuclease I (T7EI), Tracking of Indels by Decomposition (TIDE), Inference of CRISPR Edits (ICE), droplet digital PCR (ddPCR), and live-cell assays involving engineered fluorescent reporter cells. Through a comparative analysis, this study highlights the unique strengths and limitations of each method, aiding researchers in choosing the most appropriate method for their specific needs, ensuring more tailored monitoring of genome editing outcomes in a precise and reliable manner.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.