ReviewmSphere2019
Molecular Detection of Biological Agents in the Field: Then and Now.
Review in mSphere, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Research Progress on Point-of-Care Testing Technology for Mycoplasma Pneumonia.International journal of general medicine · 2026Review
- Methods, applications, and computational challenges in bait capture enrichment.Cell reports methods · 2025Review
- Vacuum Oven Drying: A Cost-Effective Way of Producing Field-Deployable Reagents for In-house Real-Time PCR Methods.Molecular biotechnology · 2025Article
- Genetic Mapping of Tolerance to Bacterial Stem Blight Caused byPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- End-User Perspectives on Using Quantitative Real-Time PCR and Genomic Sequencing in the Field.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2022Article
- Development and evaluation of a multiplex droplet digital polymerase chain reaction method for simultaneous detection of five biothreat pathogens.Frontiers in microbiology · 2022Article
- Assessing Climate Change Impact on Ecosystems and Infectious Disease: Important Roles for Genomic Sequencing and a One Health Perspective.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2020Article
- Molecular Approaches for Low-Cost Point-of-Care Pathogen Detection in Agriculture and Forestry.Frontiers in plant science · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Molecular detection of biological agents in the field has traditionally relied on the use of quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR), which now includes commercially available instruments that can be used in the laboratory or field. Adapting this technology for field-forward applications necessitated innovation to minimize size, weight, and power requirements. Rugged, portable instruments, efficient power sources, freeze-dried reagents, data communications, and standard operating procedures for minimally trained users are some examples of limitations that have been overcome to allow qPCR-based data to be generated at the point of need. Despite the high specificity and sensitivity of qPCR, the assays require
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.