Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32526200›Full record

ArticleAnalytical biochemistry2020

Analysis and uncertainty quantification of DNA fluorescence melt data: Applications of affine transformations.

Paul N Patrone, Anthony J Kearsley, Jacob M Majikes, J Alexander Liddle

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Analytical biochemistry, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Uncertainty Quantification forChemical reviews · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Affine analysis for quantitative PCR measurements.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2020
    Article
  5. 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

4 authors.

Paul N PatroneNational Institute of Standards and Technology, USA. Electronic address: paul.patrone@nist.gov.
Anthony J KearsleyNational Institute of Standards and Technology, USA.
Jacob M MajikesNational Institute of Standards and Technology, USA.
J Alexander LiddleNational Institute of Standards and Technology, USA.

Funding

Intramural NIST DOC 9999-NIST
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Fluorescence-based measurements are a standard tool for characterizing the thermodynamic properties of DNA systems. Nonetheless, experimental melt data obtained from polymerase chain-reaction (PCR) machines (for example) often leads to signals that vary significantly between datasets. In many cases, this lack of reproducibility has led to difficulties in analyzing results and computing reasonable uncertainty estimates. To address this problem, we propose a data analysis procedure based on constrained, convex optimization of affine transformations, which can determine when and how melt curves collapse onto one another. A key aspect of this approach is its ability to provide a reproducible and more objective measure of whether a collection of datasets yields a consistent "universal" signal according to an appropriate model of the raw signals. Importantly, integrating this validation step into the analysis hardens the measurement protocol by allowing one to identify experimental conditions and/or modeling assumptions that may corrupt a measurement. Moreover, this robustness facilitates extraction of thermodynamic information at no additional cost in experimental time. We illustrate and test our approach on experiments of Förster resonance energy transfer (FRET) pairs used study the thermodynamics of DNA loops.

Indexed as

Databases, FactualDNAFluorescence Resonance Energy TransferModels, MolecularNucleic Acid ConformationReproducibility of ResultsSpectrometry, FluorescenceThermodynamicsTransition TemperatureDNA

Identifiers

PMID32526200
PMCPMC7961812

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.