ArticleMethodsX2015
Improved internal control for molecular diagnosis assays.
Article in MethodsX, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
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
The two principal determining steps in molecular diagnosis are the amplification and the identification steps. Accuracy of DNA amplification is primarily determined by the annealing sequence of the PCR primer to the analyte DNA. Accuracy for identification is determined either by the annealing region of a labelled probe for the real time PCR analysis, or the annealing of a sequencing primer for DNA sequencing analysis, that binds to the respective analyte (amplicon). Presently, housekeeping genes (Beta globin, GAPDH) are used in molecular diagnosis to verify that the PCR conditions are optimum, and are thus known as amplification controls [1-4]. Although these genes have been useful as amplification controls, they lack the true definition of an internal control because the primers and annealing conditions are not identical to the analyte being assayed. This may result in a false negative report [5]. The IC-Code platform technology described here provides a true internal control where the internal control and analyte share identical PCR primers annealing sequences for the amplification step and identical sequencing primer annealing sequence for the identification step. •The analyte and internal control have the same PCR and sequencing annealing sequences.•This method assures for little or no false negatives and false positives due to the method's design of using identical annealing conditions for the internal control and analyte, and by using DNA sequencing analysis for the identification step of the analyte, respectively.•This method also allows for a set lower limit of detection to be used by varying the amount of internal control used in the assay.
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.