Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31777417›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical biochemistry and nutrition2019

Measurement of homocysteine: a historical perspective.

Sreyoshi Fatima Alam, Santosh Kumar, Paul Ganguly

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical biochemistry and nutrition, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Optical bio/chemical sensors for vitamin BBeilstein journal of nanotechnology · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Hyperhomocysteinemia: Clinical Insights.Journal of central nervous system disease · 2020
    Review
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.

Sreyoshi Fatima AlamCollege of Medicine, Alfaisal University, PO Box 50927, Riyadh 11533, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Santosh KumarCollege of Medicine, Alfaisal University, PO Box 50927, Riyadh 11533, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Paul GangulyCollege of Medicine, Alfaisal University, PO Box 50927, Riyadh 11533, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Elevated plasma level of homocysteine is being increasingly associated with many diseases. There is a significant interest in the development of methods to determine the total homocysteine in biologically relevant tissues. Over the years, researchers use various methods to determine the exact concentrations of homocysteine in these tissues. However, the precise method used in many studies earlier was questionable. We have reviewed various methodologies for the measurement of homocysteine. We list the commonly used methodologies currently in use to determine homocysteine levels. Through extensive literature search, we have come up with the most popular as well as the newest measurement modalities and listed them with a brief discussion of each of the methodology. In conclusion, we have presented the historical perspective of homocysteine measurement in biological fluids in this manuscript. Thus, the precise understanding of its concentration in biological fluids coupled with its importance in health and disease should justify a newer but reliable technique in the area of ongoing research in homocysteine.

Indexed as

enzymatic assayhomocysteine measurementHPLCimmunoassaymethodology

Identifiers

PMID31777417
PMCPMC6877406

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.