The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 3 are not checked yet.
Large deletions induced by Cas9 cleavage
Open accessOverview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Adikusama et al. targeted six genes in a total of 127 early mouse embryos and detected large deletions (between 100bp and 2.3kb) in 45% of their samples using long-range PCR (10).”
From Frequent loss of heterozygosity in CRISPR-Cas9–edited early human embryos (2021) · cites this paper as [10]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“CRISPR-Cas9-induced deletions larger than these fragments in either direction would eliminate one or both PCR primer annealing sites.This in turn can lead to amplification of only one allele, giving the false impression that targeting was unsuccessful or that there is a single homozygous event at the on-target site (9,10,15).”
From Frequent loss of heterozygosity in CRISPR-Cas9–edited early human embryos (2021) · cites this paper as [10]
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“Of note, large deletions were generally more prevalent when they targeted intronic regions (>70%) than when they targeted exons (20%).”
From Frequent loss of heterozygosity in CRISPR-Cas9–edited early human embryos (2021) · cites this paper as [10]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Multiplex Genome Engineering Using CRISPR/Cas Systems
Cong, L., Ran, F. A., Cox, D., Lin, S., Barretto, R., Habib, N., Hsu, P. D., Wu, X., Jiang, W., Marraffini, L. A., et al. (2013) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1231143 · Cited by 15,339
Genome engineering using the CRISPR-Cas9 system
Ran, F. A., Hsu, P. D., Wright, J., Agarwala, V., Scott, D. A., & Zhang, F. (2013) · Nature Protocols · doi:10.1038/nprot.2013.143 · Cited by 11,133
Wang, H., Yang, H., Shivalila, C. S., Dawlaty, M. M., Cheng, A. W., Zhang, F., & Jaenisch, R. (2013) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2013.04.025 · Cited by 3,495
Kosicki, M., Tomberg, K., & Bradley, A. (2018) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt.4192 · Cited by 1,883
Correction of a pathogenic gene mutation in human embryos
Ma, H., Marti-Gutierrez, N., Park, S.-W., Wu, J., Lee, Y., Suzuki, K., Koski, A., Ji, D., Hayama, T., Ahmed, R., et al. (2017) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature23305 · Cited by 992
CRISPR/Cas9 targeting events cause complex deletions and insertions at 17 sites in the mouse genome
Shin, H. Y., Wang, C., Lee, H., Yoo, K. H., Zeng, X., Kuhns, T. M., Yang, C. M., Mohr, T., Liu, C., & Hennighausen, L. G. (2017) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms15464 · Cited by 317
Somatic CRISPR/Cas9-mediated tumour suppressor disruption enables versatile brain tumour modelling
Zuckermann, M., Hovestadt, V., Knobbe-Thomsen, C. B., Zapatka, M., Northcott, P. A., Schramm, K., Belic, J., Jones, D. T. W., Tschida, B., Moriarity, B., et al. (2015) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms8391 · Cited by 283
Inter-homologue repair in fertilized human eggs?
Egli, D., Zuccaro, M. V., Kosicki, M., Church, G. M., Bradley, A., & Jasin, M. (2018) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-018-0379-5 · Cited by 111
Parikh, B. A., Beckman, D. L., Patel, S. J., White, J. M., & Yokoyama, W. M. (2015) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0116484 · Cited by 55
Efficient Detection, Quantification and Enrichment of Subtle Allelic Alterations
Chen, J., Zhang, X., Wang, T., Li, Z., Guan, G., & Hong, Y. (2012) · DNA Research · doi:10.1093/dnares/dss023 · Cited by 55
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–101 of 101
CRISPR/Cas9-based gene-editing technology for sickle cell disease
Ma, L., Yang, S., Peng, Q., Zhang, J., & Zhang, J. (2023) · Gene · doi:10.1016/j.gene.2023.147480 · Cited by 45
Metadata
- Authors
- Adikusuma, F., Piltz, S., Corbett, M. A., Turvey, M., McColl, S. R., Helbig, K. J., Beard, M. R., Hughes, J., Pomerantz, R. T., & Thomas, P. Q.
- Affiliations
- Diponegoro University (ID)
- South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute (AU)
- The University of Adelaide (AU)
- Singapore-MIT Alliance for Research and Technology (SG)
- La Trobe University (AU)
- Temple University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Thomas, Paul Q.
- ORCID
- Venue
- Nature
- Published
- 2018-08
- Volume
- 560
- Issue
- 7717
- Pages
- E8-E9
- ISSN
- 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
- 1476-4687
- OpenAlex
- W2885661865
- Cited by
- 371
- References
- 8
- Citations by year
- 2026: 19 · 2025: 39 · 2024: 63 · 2023: 60 · 2022: 69 · 2021: 44 · 2020: 41 · 2019: 26 · 2018: 10
- FWCI
- 10.76
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Nature (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Oregon Health and Science University
- Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust
- South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute
- Temple University
- Consorzio Interuniversitario Biotecnologie
- Moxie Foundation
- La Trobe University
- University of Adelaide
- Government of Jiangxi Province
- Universitas Diponegoro
- Institute for Basic Science (IBSR021-D1, R021-D1)
- Directorate for Biological Sciences
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › CRISPR and Genetic Engineering
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › RNA regulation and disease
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › DNA Repair Mechanisms
- Keywords
- CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing, MYBPC3 mutation, large deletions, DNA double-strand break repair, mouse embryo model
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
