Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31608116›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in genetics2019

A Case for Using Genomics and a Bioinformatics Pipeline to Develop Sensitive and Species-Specific PCR-Based Diagnostics for Soil-Transmitted Helminths.

Jessica R Grant, Nils Pilotte, Steven A Williams

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in genetics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Diagnostic Techniques for Soil-Transmitted Helminths - Recent Advances.Research and reports in tropical medicine · 2021
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

3 authors.

Jessica R GrantDepartment of Biological Sciences, Smith College, Northampton, MA, United States.
Nils PilotteDepartment of Biological Sciences, Smith College, Northampton, MA, United States.
Steven A WilliamsDepartment of Biological Sciences, Smith College, Northampton, MA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The balance of expense and ease of use vs. specificity and sensitivity in diagnostic assays for helminth disease is an important consideration, with expense and ease often winning out in endemic areas where funds and sophisticated equipment may be scarce. In this review, we argue that molecular diagnostics, specifically new assays that have been developed with the aid of next-generation sequence data and robust bioinformatic tools, more than make up for their expense with the benefit of a clear and precise assessment of the situation on the ground. Elimination efforts associated with the London Declaration and the World Health Organization (WHO) 2020 Roadmap have resulted in areas of low disease incidence and reduced infection burdens. An accurate assessment of infection levels is critical for determining where and when the programs can be successfully ended. Thus, more sensitive assays are needed in locations where elimination efforts are approaching a successful conclusion. Although microscopy or more general PCR targets have a role to play, they can mislead and cause study results to be confounded. Hyper-specific qPCR assays enable a more definitive assessment of the situation in the field, as well as of shifting dynamics and emerging diseases.

Indexed as

DNA diagnosticsmolecular diagnosticspolymerase chain reaction (PCR)quantitative PCRsoil-transmitted helminth

Identifiers

PMID31608116
PMCPMC6768101

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.