Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17189632›Full record

ReviewExperimental parasitology2007

Molecular methods for diagnosis of Entamoeba histolytica in a clinical setting: an overview.

Jaishree Paul, Shweta Srivastava, Sudha Bhattacharya

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Experimental parasitology, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Molecular Detection of a PathogenicPolish journal of microbiology · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Molecular-Genotyping Detection ofArchives of Razi Institute · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Molecular Identification and Prevalence ofPolish journal of microbiology · 2020
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Hepatic amebiasis: a reminder of the complications.Current opinion in pediatrics · 2009
    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

3 authors.

Jaishree PaulJawaharlal Nehru University, School of Life Sciences, Delhi 110067, India. jaishree@mail.jnu.ac.in
Shweta Srivastava
Sudha Bhattacharya

Funding

ENTAMOEBA HISTOLYTICA GENOME PROJECTR01AI046516 · NIAID · INSTITUTE FOR GENOMIC RESEARCH · PI LOFTUS, BRENDAN · 2000 to 2002
$1.9M
NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI046516
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The range of clinical outcomes following Entamoeba histolytica infection is likely to be influenced by the different strains of the parasite already existing in our population. There is a need for developing faster, reliable and reproducible methods for identifying the different strains of E. histolytica. This would have a major impact on the subsequent course of treatment given to patients. In the post-genomic era, different loci of the Entamoeba genome have been targeted for developing suitable probes and genetic markers. This review highlights the development made in this direction and the possibility of using these methods for routine testing of this parasite in clinical samples.

Indexed as

AnimalsEntamoeba histolyticaEntamoebiasisFecesGenetic VariationHumansImmunoblottingMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesNucleic Acid HybridizationOligonucleotide Array Sequence AnalysisPolymerase Chain ReactionPolymorphism, Single NucleotideRetroelementsRetroelements

Identifiers

PMID17189632
PMCPMC4247990

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.