ArticlePloS one2016
Efficacy Assessment of Nucleic Acid Decontamination Reagents Used in Molecular Diagnostic Laboratories.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 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
19 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ground squirrel coprolites preserve complex archives of ancient environmental DNA over 700,000 years.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Water line biofilm regrowth dynamics in six wean-to-finish farms post peracetic acid water line cleaning and disinfection.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Article
- Sustainability in the laboratory: evaluating the reusability of microtitre plates for PCR and fragment detection.Royal Society open science · 2025Article
- Influence of Selected Factors on the Survival Assessment and Detection ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- The pattern of RNA integrity and the expression of housekeeping genes are influenced by sodium hypochlorite and ascorbic acid.American journal of stem cells · 2023Article
- Best practices for generating and analyzing 16S rRNA amplicon data to track coral microbiome dynamics.Frontiers in microbiology · 2022Review
- An Improved Method for the Extraction of Nucleic Acids from Plant Tissue without Grinding to Detect Plant Viruses and Viroids.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Laboratory-Generated DNA Can Cause Anomalous Pathogen Diagnostic Test Results.Microbiology spectrum · 2021Article
- Biologia Futura: use of biocides during COVID-19-global reshuffling of the microbiota.Biologia futura · 2021Review
- Follow-up testing of borderline SARS-CoV-2 patients by rRT-PCR allows early diagnosis of COVID-19.Diagnostic microbiology and infectious disease · 2021Article
- Article
- Chinese Expert Consensus on the Nucleic Acid Detection of SARS-CoV-2.Annals of translational medicine · 2020Review
- Comparative aspects of laboratory testing for the detection ofJournal of veterinary diagnostic investigation : official publication of the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc · 2020Article
- Best practices for performance of real-time PCR assays in veterinary diagnostic laboratories.Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation : official publication of the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc · 2020Article
- Expert consensus-based laboratory testing of SARS-CoV-2.Journal of thoracic disease · 2020Review
- Analysis of Tick Surface Decontamination Methods.Microorganisms · 2020Article
- Plasmid DNA contaminant in molecular reagents.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- International proficiency trial demonstrates reliable Schmallenberg virus infection diagnosis in endemic and non-affected countries.PloS one · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The occurrence of nucleic acid cross contamination in the laboratory resulting in false positive results of diagnostic samples is seriously problematic. Despite precautions to minimize or even avoid nucleic acid cross contaminations, it may appear anyway. Until now, no standardized strategy is available to evaluate the efficacy of commercially offered decontamination reagents. Therefore, a protocol for the reliable determination of nucleic acid decontamination efficacy using highly standardized solution and surface tests was established and validated. All tested sodium hypochlorite-based reagents proved to be highly efficient in nucleic acid decontamination even after short reaction times. For DNA Away, a sodium hydroxide-based decontamination product, dose- and time-dependent effectiveness was ascertained. For two other commercial decontamination reagents, the phosphoric acid-based DNA Remover and the non-enzymatic reagent DNA-ExitusPlus™ IF, no reduction of amplifiable DNA/RNA was observed. In conclusion, a simple test procedure for evaluation of the elimination efficacy of decontamination reagents against amplifiable nucleic acid is presented.
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.