The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Mouse models of human disease. Part I: techniques and resources for genetic analysis in mice.
Open accessAbstract
The mouse is an ideal model organism for human disease. Not only are mice physiologically similar to humans, but a large genetic reservoir of potential models of human disease has been generated through the identification of >1000 spontaneous, radiation- or chemically induced mutant loci. In addition, a number of recent technological advances have dramatically increased our ability to create mouse models of human disease. These technological advances include the development of highresolution genetic and physical linkage maps of the mouse genome, which in turn are facilitating the identification and cloning of mouse disease loci. Furthermore, transgenic technologies that allow one to ectopically express or make germ-line mutations in virtually any gene in the mouse genome have been developed, as well as methods for analyzing complex genetic diseases. In Part I of this review, we summarize some of the classical and modern approaches that have fueled the recent dramatic explosion in mouse disease model development. In Part II of this review, we list >100 mouse models of human disease where the homologous gene has been shown to be mutated in both human and mouse (Bedell et al., this issue). In the vast majority of these models, the mouse mutant phenotype very closely resembles the human disease phenotype and these models therefore provide valuable resources to understand how the diseases develop and to test ways to prevent or treat these diseases. Additionally, we highlight a number of areas of this research where significant progress has been made in the past few years.
Overview
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.
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
Mutagenesis and Mapping of a Mouse Gene, Clock , Essential for Circadian Behavior
Vitaterna, M. H., King, D. P., Chang, A.-M., Kornhauser, J. M., Lowrey, P. L., McDonald, J. D., Dove, W. F., Pinto, L. H., Turek, F. W., & Takahashi, J. S. (1994) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.8171325 · Cited by 1,632
Gene-targeting studies of mammalian behavior: is it the mutation or the background genotype?
Gerlai, R. (1996) · Trends in Neurosciences · doi:10.1016/s0166-2236(96)20020-7 · Cited by 881
Cited by
Surgical Approaches to Create Murine Models of Human Wound Healing
Wong, V. W., Sorkin, M., Glotzbach, J. P., Longaker, M. T., & Gurtner, G. C. (2011) · BioMed Research International · doi:10.1155/2011/969618 · Cited by 419
Of Mice, Dirty Mice, and Men: Using Mice To Understand Human Immunology
Masopust, D., Sivula, C. P., & Jameson, S. C. (2017) · The Journal of Immunology · doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1700453 · Cited by 293
The top skin-associated genes: a comparative analysis of human and mouse skin transcriptomes
Gerber, P. A., Buhren, B. A., Schrumpf, H., Homey, B., Zlotnik, A., & Hevezi, P. (2014) · Biological Chemistry · doi:10.1515/hsz-2013-0279 · Cited by 129
Metadata
- Authors
- Bedell, M. A., Jenkins, N. A., & Copeland, N. G.
- Venue
- Genes & Development
- Publisher
- Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
- Published
- 1997-01-01
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-10
- ISSN
- 0890-9369 (ISSN-L)
- 1549-5477
- OpenAlex
- W2141638474
- Cited by
- 164
- References
- 2
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Mouse models of human disease. Part I: techniques and resources for genetic analysis in mice. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1101/gad.11.1.1
- The paper
- Bedell, M. A., Jenkins, N. A., & Copeland, N. G. (1997). Mouse models of human disease. Part I: techniques and resources for genetic analysis in mice. Genes & Development. https://doi.org/10.1101/gad.11.1.1
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.