ReviewMolecular biology reports2020
Recent advances in the nucleic acid-based diagnostic tool for coronavirus.
Review in Molecular biology reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Aspects of Nanotechnology for COVID-19 Vaccine Development and Its Delivery Applications.Pharmaceutics · 2023Review
- Advancing the automation of plant nucleic acid extraction for rapid diagnosis of plant diseases in space.Frontiers in plant science · 2023Article
- Genosensors as an alternative diagnostic sensing approaches for specific detection of virus species: A review of common techniques and outcomes.Trends in analytical chemistry : TRAC · 2022Review
- Review
- Comparative study of different SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic techniques.Journal of virological methods · 2021Article
- A comprehensive review of COVID-19 biology, diagnostics, therapeutics, and disease impacting the central nervous system.Journal of neurovirology · 2021Review
- A collection of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) detection assays, issues, and challenges.Heliyon · 2021Review
- SARS-CoV-2 Subgenomic N (Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Antigen tests for COVID-19.Biophysics and physicobiology · 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recently in China, a novel coronavirus outbreak took place which caused pneumonia-like symptoms. This coronavirus belongs to the family of SARS and MERS and causes respiratory system disease known as COVID-19. At present we use polymerase chain reaction (PCR) based molecular biology methods for the detection of coronavirus. Other than these PCR based methods, some improved methods also exist such as microarray-based techniques, Real time-quantitative PCR, CRISPR-Cas13 based tools but almost all of the available methods have advantages and disadvantages. There are many limitations associated with this method and hence there is a need for a fast, more sensitive, and specific diagnostic tool which can detect a greater number of samples in less time. Here we have summarised currently available nucleic acid-based diagnostic methods for the detection of coronavirus and the need for developing a better technique for a fast and sensitive detection of coronavirus infections. Nucleic acid based detection tool for SARS-CoV-2.
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.