Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12802015›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2003

Direct molecular haplotyping of long-range genomic DNA with M1-PCR.

Chunming Ding, Charles R Cantor

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

35 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Whole-genome haplotyping by dilution, amplification, and sequencing.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2013
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Digital PCR for the molecular detection of fetal chromosomal aneuploidy.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2007
    Article
  17. Automated comparative sequence analysis by base-specific cleavage and mass spectrometry for nucleic acid-based microbial typing.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2007
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

2 authors.

Chunming DingBioinformatics Program and Center for Advanced Biotechnology, Boston University, 36 Cummington Street, Boston, MA 02215, USA.
Charles R Cantor

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Haplotypes, combinations of several phase-determined polymorphic markers, are extremely valuable for studies of disease association and chromosome evolution. Here we describe a technique called M1-PCR (M for "multiplex" and 1 for "single-copy DNA molecules") that enables direct molecular haplotyping of several polymorphic markers separated by as many as 24 kb. A genomic DNA sample first is diluted to approximately single-copy. The haplotype is directly determined by simultaneously genotyping several polymorphic markers in the same reaction with a multiplex PCR and base extension reaction. This approach does not rely on pedigree data and does not require previous amplification of the entire genomic region containing the selected markers.

Indexed as

Genetic TechniquesGlycoproteinsHaplotypesCarrier ProteinsCholesterol Ester Transfer ProteinsDNADNA PrimersGenome, HumanGenotypeHumansModels, GeneticPedigreePolymerase Chain ReactionSequence Analysis, DNACarrier ProteinsCETP protein, humanCholesterol Ester Transfer ProteinsDNADNA PrimersGlycoproteins

Identifiers

PMID12802015
PMCPMC164606

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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 OpenQuestion graph.