Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22887891›Full record

ReviewBiotechnology journal2012

Stepping stones in DNA sequencing.

Henrik Stranneheim, Joakim Lundeberg

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biotechnology journal, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing 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

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. NGS-Based Identification of Two NovelInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Long-read sequencing for brain tumors.Frontiers in oncology · 2024
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Multigene Phylogeny Reveals Endophytic Xylariales Novelties fromJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Guidelines for Sanger sequencing and molecular assay monitoring.Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation : official publication of the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc · 2020
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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.

Henrik StranneheimScience for Life Laboratory, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden. henrik.stranneheim@scilifelab.se
Joakim Lundeberg

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent years there have been tremendous advances in our ability to rapidly and cost-effectively sequence DNA. This has revolutionized the fields of genetics and biology, leading to a deeper understanding of the molecular events in life processes. The rapid technological advances have enormously expanded sequencing opportunities and applications, but also imposed strains and challenges on steps prior to sequencing and in the downstream process of handling and analysis of these massive amounts of sequence data. Traditionally, sequencing has been limited to small DNA fragments of approximately one thousand bases (derived from the organism's genome) due to issues in maintaining a high sequence quality and accuracy for longer read lengths. Although many technological breakthroughs have been made, currently the commercially available massively parallel sequencing methods have not been able to resolve this issue. However, recent announcements in nanopore sequencing hold the promise of removing this read-length limitation, enabling sequencing of larger intact DNA fragments. The ability to sequence longer intact DNA with high accuracy is a major stepping stone towards greatly simplifying the downstream analysis and increasing the power of sequencing compared to today. This review covers some of the technical advances in sequencing that have opened up new frontiers in genomics.

Indexed as

GenomicsHumansNanotechnologySequence Analysis, DNA

Identifiers

PMID22887891
PMCPMC3472021

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.