Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16049303›Full record

ReviewThe Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD2005

Experience and strategy for the molecular testing of Duchenne muscular dystrophy.

Thomas W Prior, Scott J Bridgeman

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 57 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
57citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
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

57 citing papers in PubMed, 148 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Repurposing Pathogenic Variants ofCurrent genomics · 2019
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Clinical Utility Gene Card for: Becker muscular dystrophy.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2018
    Article
  18. CUGC for Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD).European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2018
    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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Thomas W PriorDepartment of Pathology, The Ohio State University, 125 Hamilton Hall, 1645 Neil Ave., Columbus, Ohio 43210, USA. prior-1@medctr.osu.edu
Scott J Bridgeman
The Ohio State University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mutations in the dystrophin gene result in both Duchenne and Becker muscular dystrophies (DMD and BMD). Approximately two-thirds of the affected patients have large deletions or duplications. Using the multiplex polymerase chain reaction and Southern blotting techniques, the detection of these larger mutations is relatively straightforward. Detection of the point mutations in the remaining one-third of the patients has been challenging, mainly due to the large gene size and lack of hotspots or prevalent mutations. However, with the addition of some of the newer molecular screening methods, it is becoming more feasible for clinical laboratories to test for point mutations in the larger genes like dystrophin. Here we review the clinical features, describe the mutation distributions, evaluate current molecular strategies, and illustrate how the genetic findings have impacted the current clinical diagnostics of Duchenne and Becker muscular dystrophies.

Indexed as

DystrophinFemaleGenetic TestingHumansMaleMuscular DystrophiesPedigreePoint MutationPrenatal DiagnosisDystrophin

Identifiers

PMID16049303
PMCPMC1867542
OpenAlexW1970560691

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.