Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26566462›Full record

ReviewCurrent genetic medicine reports

Understanding the Basics of NGS: From Mechanism to Variant Calling.

Dale Muzzey, Eric A Evans, Caroline Lieber

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current genetic medicine reports. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 61 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
61citing 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

61 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Microstructural disease and hypoperfusion in dilated cardiomyopathy underpin midwall septal fibrosis.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Comparative Phenotypic and Genotypic Analysis ofAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

1 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Dale MuzzeyCounsyl Inc., 180 Kimball Way, South San Francisco, CA 94080 USA.
Eric A EvansCounsyl Inc., 180 Kimball Way, South San Francisco, CA 94080 USA.
Caroline LieberCounsyl Inc., 180 Kimball Way, South San Francisco, CA 94080 USA ; Joan H Marks Graduate Program in Human Genetics, Sarah Lawrence College, Bronxville, NY USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Identifying disease-causing mutations in DNA has long been the goal of genetic medicine. In the last decade, the toolkit for discovering DNA variants has undergone rapid evolution: mutations that were historically discovered by analog approaches like Sanger sequencing and multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification ("MLPA") can now be decoded from a digital signal with next-generation sequencing ("NGS"). Given the explosive growth of NGS-based tests in the clinic, it is of the utmost importance that medical practitioners have a fundamental understanding of the newest NGS methodologies. To that end, here we provide a very basic overview of how NGS works, with particular emphasis on the close resemblance between the underlying chemistry of Sanger sequencing and NGS. Using a pair of simple analogies, we develop an intuitive framework for understanding how high-confidence detection of single-nucleotide polymorphisms, indels, and large deletions/duplications is possible with NGS alone.

Indexed as

Del/dup callingNext-generation sequencing (NGS)Read depthSNP/indel callingVariant calling

Identifiers

PMID26566462
PMCPMC4633438

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.