ArticleBioTechniques2020
A rapid and simple bead-bashing-based method for genomic DNA extraction from mammalian tissue.
Article in BioTechniques, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nano-RAPID: Integrated Diagnosis for Sarcoma Using a Nanopore Sequencer.Genes, chromosomes & cancer · 2026Article
- Optimized Method for Efficient DNA Extraction from Agricultural Soils.Methods and protocols · 2026Article
- Article
- Review
- Article
- Development and validation of a flexible DNA extraction (PAN) method for liquid biopsy of multiple sample types.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Conventional genomic DNA (gDNA) extraction methods can take hours to complete, may require fume hoods and represent the most time-consuming step in many gDNA-based molecular assays. We systematically optimized a bead bashing-based (BBB) approach for rapid gDNA extraction without the need for a fume hood. Human tissue specimens (n = 34) subjected to the 12-min BBB method yielded 0.40 ± 0.17 (mean ± SD) μg of gDNA per milligram of tissue, sufficient for many downstream applications, and 3- and 6-min extensions resulted in an additional 0.43 ± 0.23 μg and 0.48 ± 0.43 μg per milligram of tissue, respectively. The BBB method provides a simple and rapid method for gDNA extraction from mammalian tissue that is applicable to time-sensitive clinical applications.
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.