Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31598517›Full record

ReviewMedical hypothesis, discovery & innovation ophthalmology journal2019

Polymerase Chain Reaction and Its Application in the Diagnosis of Infectious Keratitis.

Harry Y Liu, Grant C Hopping, Uma Vaidyanathan, Yasmyne C Ronquillo, Phillip C Hoopes, Majid Moshirfar

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Medical hypothesis, discovery & innovation ophthalmology journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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

43 citing papers in PubMed, 69 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Recent Developments onFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Acanthamoeba keratitis: from pathophysiology to prevention, a contemporary clinical perspective.Medical hypothesis, discovery & innovation ophthalmology journal · 2025
    Review
  14. Renaissance of an Emerging Pathogen-Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Detection ofNarra J · 2024
    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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Harry Y LiuHealth Science Center, McGovern Medical School, University of Texas, Houston, TX, USA.
Grant C HoppingHealth Science Center, McGovern Medical School, University of Texas, Houston, TX, USA.
Uma VaidyanathanHealth Science Center, McGovern Medical School, University of Texas, Houston, TX, USA.
Yasmyne C RonquilloJohn A. Moran Eye Center, Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Phillip C HoopesJohn A. Moran Eye Center, Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Majid MoshirfarJohn A. Moran Eye Center, Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
University of Utah · USMinnesota Lions Eye Bank · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PCR involves a repeating cycle of replication to amplify small segments of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA). A novel application of this technique is microbial identification in infectious keratitis, one of the leading causes of blindness in the world. PCR is more sensitive than biological stains and culture, which are considered the current gold standards for diagnosing infectious keratitis. The diagnosis and treatment of infectious keratitis cost the United States millions of dollars in health expenditure. PCR may help offset that cost by allowing for individualized disease management and screening for multiple antibiotic-resistant genes. While beneficial, PCR demonstrates lower specificity rates compared to culture and stain, indicating its shortcomings; this can be overcome by performing PCR after narrowing the pool of potential microorganisms. This article examines the clinical utility of PCR in cases of infectious keratitis by evaluating its reliability, validity, associated costs, and indications.

Indexed as

CultureFungiKeratitisPolymerase Chain ReactionStaining and LabelingVirology

Identifiers

PMID31598517
PMCPMC6778471
OpenAlexW3004307017

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.