Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32643563›Full record

ReviewEmerging microbes & infections2020

Next-generation pathogen diagnosis with CRISPR/Cas-based detection methods.

Xinjie Wang, Xiaoyun Shang, Xingxu Huang

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Emerging microbes & infections, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 77 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
77citing 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

77 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Naked-Eye and On-Site Detection ofFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

17 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Xinjie WangShanghai Institute for Advanced Immunochemical Studies, ShanghaiTech University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1882-7845
Xiaoyun ShangSuzhou Maximum Bio-tech Co., Ltd., Suzhou, People's Republic of China.
Xingxu HuangSchool of Life Science and Technology, ShanghaiTech University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8934-1247

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ideal methods for detecting pathogens should be sensitive, specific, rapid, cost-effective and instrument-free. Conventional nucleic acid pathogen detection strategies, mostly PCR-based techniques, have various limitations, such as expensive equipment, reagents and skilled performance. Recently, CRISPR/Cas-based methods have burst onto the scene, with the potential to power the pathogen detection field. Here we introduce these unique methods and discuss its hurdles and promises.

Indexed as

CRISPR-Cas SystemsCommunicable DiseasesCRISPR-Associated ProteinsHumansMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesRNA, Guide, CRISPR-Cas SystemsSensitivity and SpecificityCRISPR-Associated ProteinsRNA, Guide, CRISPR-Cas SystemsCRISPR-Casinfection disease detectionNucleic acid detectionpathogen diagnosticpoint-of-care testing

Identifiers

PMID32643563
PMCPMC7473117

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.