ArticleIranian journal of parasitology
The Impact of Different Copro-preservation Conditions on Molecular Detection of
Article in Iranian journal of parasitology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Red Fox (Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Identification and Evaluation ofMicrobiology spectrum · 2023Article
- High Diversity ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Cryptosporidiosis: A zoonotic disease concern.Veterinary world · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe aimed to evaluate different copro-preservation conditions along the duration of one month for a better outcome of molecular diagnosis of
methodsTen samples out of 380 fresh stool samples collected from patients with diarrhea proved positive after direct examination, concentration, staining and confirmed by immunochromatographic test. The study was conducted at the Diagnostic and Research Unit of Parasitic diseases, Faculty of Medicine, Ain Shams University at the time interval from July 2014 to December 2015. Each stool sample was preserved in five different conditions; freezing at -20 °C, 70% ethyl alcohol, 10% formalin, 2.5% potassium dichromate (K dichromate) at 4 °C and 2.5% K dichromate at room temperature (RT). Then DNA extraction and nested PCR, with
resultsSensitivity of studied preservative conditions along the whole study duration showed best outcome from freezing at -20 °C (80%) then K dichromate (4 °C) (73.3%) followed by K dichromate (RT) (66.7%), then alcohol (33.3%), while formalin was the worst (0%) with a highly significant comparative outcome between the different conditions. Along the three extraction intervals, K dichromate (RT), unlike all the rest of conditions lacks the consistent preservative action.
conclusionOur study highlights freezing at -20 °C to be the most suitable condition for preservation followed by K dichromate at 4 °C, K dichromate at RT, then 70% ethyl alcohol. Formalin (10%) is better to be avoided.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28761489PMC5527039What 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.