ArticlePloS one
Inability of 'Whole Genome Amplification' to Improve Success Rates for the Biomolecular Detection of Tuberculosis in Archaeological Samples.
Article in PloS one. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Droplet based whole genome amplification for sequencing minute amounts of purified Mycobacterium tuberculosis DNA.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- The Evolution of Diagnostic Techniques in the Paleopathology of Tuberculosis: A Scoping Review.Pathogens & immunity · 2023Article
- Tuberculosis in post-contact Native Americans of Brazil: Paleopathological and paleogenetic evidence from the Tenetehara-Guajajara.PloS one · 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We assessed the ability of whole genome amplification (WGA) to improve the efficiency of downstream polymerase chain reactions (PCRs) directed at ancient DNA (aDNA) of members of the Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex (MTBC). Using extracts from a variety of bones and a tooth from human skeletons with or without lesions indicative of tuberculosis, from multiple time periods, we obtained inconsistent results. We conclude that WGA does not provide any advantage in studies of MTBC aDNA. The sporadic nature of our results are probably due to the fact that WGA is itself a PCR-based procedure which, although designed to deal with fragmented DNA, might be inefficient with the low concentration of templates in an aDNA extract. As such, WGA is subject to similar, if not the same, restrictions as PCR when applied to aDNA.
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.