ArticlePloS one2017
Screening of deafness-causing DNA variants that are common in patients of European ancestry using a microarray-based approach.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- GJB2-Related Hearing Loss: Genotype-Phenotype Correlations, Natural History, and Emerging Therapeutic Strategies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- LINE-1 global DNA methylation, iron homeostasis genes, sex and age in sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL).Human genomics · 2023Article
- Increased diagnosis of enlarged vestibular aqueduct by multiplex PCR enrichment and next-generation sequencing of the SLC26A4 gene.Molecular genetics & genomic medicine · 2021Article
- Review
- Identification of a novel mutation in CRYM in a Chinese family with hearing loss using whole-exome sequencing.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2020Article
- Review
- Article
- Genetic screening as an adjunct to universal newborn hearing screening: literature review and implications for non-congenital pre-lingual hearing loss.International journal of audiology · 2019Review
- A proposal for comprehensive newborn hearing screening to improve identification of deaf and hard-of-hearing children.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2019Article
- Screening of 10 DFNB Loci Causing Autosomal Recessive Non-Syndromic Hearing Loss in Two Iranian Populations Negative forIranian journal of public health · 2019Article
- Mutation analysis of common deafness genes among 1,201 patients with non-syndromic hearing loss in Shanxi Province.Molecular genetics & genomic medicine · 2019Article
- Shortage of Cellular ATP as a Cause of Diseases and Strategies to Enhance ATP.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2019Article
- Global genetic insight contributed by consanguineous Pakistani families segregating hearing loss.Human mutation · 2019Article
- Review
- Article
- Recent Advancements in the Regeneration of Auditory Hair Cells and Hearing Restoration.Frontiers in molecular neuroscience · 2017Review
- Diagnosing and Preventing Hearing Loss in the Genomic Age.Trends in hearingReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
The unparalleled heterogeneity in genetic causes of hearing loss along with remarkable differences in prevalence of causative variants among ethnic groups makes single gene tests technically inefficient. Although hundreds of genes have been reported to be associated with nonsyndromic hearing loss (NSHL), GJB2, GJB6, SLC26A4, and mitochondrial (mt) MT-RNR1 and MTTS are the major contributors. In order to provide a faster, more comprehensive and cost effective assay, we constructed a DNA fluidic array, CapitalBioMiamiOtoArray, for the detection of sequence variants in five genes that are common in most populations of European descent. They consist of c.35delG, p.W44C, p.L90P, c.167delT (GJB2); 309kb deletion (GJB6); p.L236P, p.T416P (SLC26A4); and m.1555A>G, m.7444G>A (mtDNA). We have validated our hearing loss array by analyzing a total of 160 DNAs samples. Our results show 100% concordance between the fluidic array biochip-based approach and the established Sanger sequencing method, thus proving its robustness and reliability at a relatively low cost.
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.