ReviewGenome research2026
A systematic guide for identifying transcription factors that directly regulate the expression of a gene of interest.
Review in Genome research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Transcriptional regulation lies at the heart of cellular identity and function, hinging on the precise binding of transcription factors (TFs) and cofactors to gene regulatory elements such as promoters and enhancers. Although it is relatively routine to profile genome-wide DNA binding landscapes of proteins, identifying the specific proteins that bind to, and regulate the transcription of, a particular gene of interest (GOI) remains a persistent experimental and conceptual challenge. This gene-centric question is complicated by the multilayered regulatory environment in which each gene resides, comprising 3D chromatin structure, enhancer-promoter looping, DNA accessibility, histone modifications, and cell state-dependent protein dynamics. In this review, we dissect the strengths, limitations, and biological relevance of current approaches for studying direct protein-DNA interactions, distinguishing between protein-centric and DNA-centric methodologies. We introduce a conceptual matrix of biological relevance, integrating the origin of DNA and protein elements (
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.