Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30105577›Full record

ArticleVirchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology2018

Validation of the Oncomine

Hannah L Williams, Kathy Walsh, Austin Diamond, Anca Oniscu, Zandra C Deans

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

49 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Retrospective Analysis to Optimize the Detection ofDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Hannah L WilliamsUKNEQAS for Molecular Genetics, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK. hlw37@st-andrews.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0434-3900
Kathy WalshNHS Lothian, Department of Molecular Pathology, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Austin DiamondNHS Lothian, Molecular Genetics, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, UK.
Anca OniscuNHS Lothian, Department of Molecular Pathology, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Zandra C DeansUKNEQAS for Molecular Genetics, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The clinical utility of next-generation sequencing (NGS) for a diverse range of targets is expanding, increasing the need for multiplexed analysis of both DNA and RNA. However, translation into daily use requires a rigorous and comprehensive validation strategy. The aim of this clinical validation was to assess the performance of the Ion Torrent Personal Genome Machine (IonPGM

Indexed as

High-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesBiomarkers, TumorComputational BiologyDNA Copy Number VariationsDNA Mutational AnalysisGene FusionGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseHumansMutationNeoplasmsPhenotypePrecision MedicinePredictive Value of TestsReproducibility of ResultsSequence Analysis, DNABiomarkers, TumorClinical validationFFPEMolecular pathologyNext-generation sequencing

Identifiers

PMID30105577
PMCPMC6182325

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.