ArticleIndian journal of clinical biochemistry : IJCB2012
Evaluation of quality of DNA extracted from buccal swabs for microarray based genotyping.
Article in Indian journal of clinical biochemistry : IJCB, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Modified Method for DNA Extraction From Buccal Cells for Genetic Epidemiological Studies Among Children.Cureus · 2024Article
- A novel approach of kinship determination based on the physical length of genetically shared regions of chromosomes.Genes & genomics · 2024Article
- Genetic characterization of the Berber-speaking population of Souss (Morocco) based on autosomal STRs.Molecular genetics & genomic medicine · 2023Article
- Quality and quantity of dromedary camel DNA sampled from whole-blood, saliva, and tail-hair.PloS one · 2019Article
- Article
- World Endometriosis Research Foundation Endometriosis Phenome and Biobanking Harmonization Project: III. Fluid biospecimen collection, processing, and storage in endometriosis research.Fertility and sterility · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Buccal cell usage has been shown by many to be a cost effective and safe method to isolate DNA for various biological experiments especially large epidemiological studies (Garcia-Closas et al. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 10:687-696, 2001). Non-invasive DNA collection methods are preferred over phlebotomy in order to increase study participation and compliance in research centers and for sick patients in hospital settings. There have been conflicting reports about the methodology and results obtained from using buccal DNA. It is not very clear if phlebotomy can be confidently replaced by buccal cell DNA. It is often left for the user to take an intelligent decision. To address this issue, we compared the performance of buccal and blood DNA from same subjects in a genotyping experiment and this paper reports the results. Cotton swab derived buccal cells were scraped from the inner side of cheeks from 16 subjects, and blood was also drawn from the same 16 subjects participating in a genotypic association study of a lipid disease. The DNA quality was assessed by resolving on agarose gels, checking purity (A260/A280) and finally by microarray hybridization. This study showed that DNA degradation affects the total yield and performance of the buccal DNA when compared to the blood DNA in microarray based genotyping. Genotyping results can be seriously compromised if care is not taken to check the quality and yields of such specimens.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.