ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2016
Does zero really mean nothing?-first experiences with the new PowerQuant(TM) system in comparison to established real-time quantification kits.
Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of fire extinguishing agents on DNA quantity and integrity.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Article
- Overlapping application of the forensic DNA analysis workflow to buried late-medieval human skeletal remains.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Article
- Review
- Exploring the potential of genetic analysis in historical blood spots for patients with iodine-deficient goiter and thyroid carcinomas in Switzerland and Germany (1929-1989).BMC medical genomics · 2024Article
- (Un)Reliable detection of menstrual blood in forensic casework - evaluation of the Seratec® PMB test with mock samples.International journal of legal medicine · 2024Article
- Knife wound or nosebleed-where does the blood at the crime scene come from?International journal of legal medicine · 2023Article
- Detecting DNA damage in stored blood samples.Forensic science, medicine, and pathology · 2023Article
- Comparing preservation substrates under field conditions for efficient DNA recovery in bone.International journal of legal medicine · 2023Article
- Bone fragment or bone powder? ATR-FTIR spectroscopy-based comparison of chemical composition and DNA preservation of bones after 10 years in a freezer.International journal of legal medicine · 2021Article
- CSYseq: The first Y-chromosome sequencing tool typing a large number of Y-SNPs and Y-STRs to unravel worldwide human population genetics.PLoS genetics · 2021Article
- Cleaning a crime scene 2.0-what to do with the bloody knife after the crime?International journal of legal medicine · 2020Article
- Impact of several wearers on the persistence of DNA on clothes-a study with experimental scenarios.International journal of legal medicine · 2018Article
- Persistence of DNA on clothes after exposure to water for different time periods-a study on bathtub, pond, and river.International journal of legal medicine · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
DNA quantification is an important step in the molecular genetic analysis of a forensic sample, hopefully providing reliable data on DNA content for a subsequent generation of reproducible STR profiles for identification. For several years, this quantification has usually been done by real-time PCR protocols and meanwhile a variety of assays are commercially available from different companies. The newest one is the PowerQuant(TM) assay by Promega Inc. which is advertised with the promise that a determined DNA concentration of 0 ng/μl in a forensic sample guarantees the impossibility to achieve true STR results, thus allowing to exclude such samples from STR analysis to save time and money. Thus, the goal of this study was to thoroughly verify the quantification step with regard to its suitability as a screening method. We have evaluated the precision and reliability of four different real-time PCR quantification assays by systematically testing DNA dilutions and forensic samples with various DNA contents. Subsequently, each sample was subjected to the Powerplex® ESX 17 fast kit to determine a reliable cutoff level for exclusion of definitely negative samples from STR analysis. An accurate quantification of different cell line DNA dilutions was not possible with any kit. However, at least the PowerQuant(TM) assay provided suitable data analyzing forensic samples, whereas in other systems up to 46 % of negative samples still displayed reliable STR analysis results. All in all, the PowerQuant(TM) assay represents a big step forward, but the evaluation of real-time PCR quantification results has still to be done with great care.
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.