Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31934273›Full record

ReviewAmerican journal of translational research2019

Principles of digital PCR and its applications in current obstetrical and gynecological diseases.

Xiaodong Mao, Chao Liu, Hua Tong, Yajun Chen, Kangsheng Liu

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in American journal of translational research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  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.

Xiaodong MaoDepartment of Endocrinology, Affiliated Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine Nanjing 210028, Jiangsu, China.
Chao LiuDepartment of Endocrinology, Affiliated Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine Nanjing 210028, Jiangsu, China.
Hua TongDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Women's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing Maternity and Child Health Care Hospital Nanjing 210029, Jiangsu, China.
Yajun ChenDepartment of Clinical Laboratory, Women's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing Maternity and Child Health Care Hospital Nanjing 210029, Jiangsu, China.
Kangsheng LiuDepartment of Clinical Laboratory, Women's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing Maternity and Child Health Care Hospital Nanjing 210029, Jiangsu, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Digital PCR (dPCR) is a revolutionary technique to precisely quantify nucleic acids. For its high sensitivity and specificity, this technique has been widely replicated worldwide. To verify its applicability, we reviewed all the related articles in PubMed database published before May 10, 2019. Original articles and reviews on the topics were selected. Entered key words included "digital PCR/dPCR", "advantage", "combined use", "microfluidic chip", "gynecological cancer/tumor". We found that dPCR has shown great potential in clinical operations, like tumor liquid biopsy, non-invasive prenatal diagnosis, microorganism detection, and next-generation sequencing library quality-control.

Indexed as

advantagesclinical usecombined usedPCRgynecological tumorsmicrofluidic chip

Identifiers

PMID31934273
PMCPMC6943456

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.