Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33471860›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Method comparison studies of telomere length measurement using qPCR approaches: A critical appraisal of the literature.

Alyssa R Lindrose, Lauren W Y McLester-Davis, Renee I Tristano, Leila Kataria, Shahinaz M Gadalla, Dan T A Eisenberg, Simon Verhulst, Stacy Drury

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 57 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
57citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

57 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Practitioner Review: Infant mental health meets cell and molecular biology - a look to the future.Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines · 2026
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Telomeres in skin aging.Biogerontology · 2025
    Review
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

8 authors.

Alyssa R LindroseDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, School of Medicine, Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-0952-1975
Lauren W Y McLester-DavisTulane Brain Institute, Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-3504-5244
Renee I TristanoSchool of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana, United States of America.
Leila KatariaSchool of Science and Engineering, Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana, United States of America.
Shahinaz M GadallaDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, United States of America.
Dan T A EisenbergDepartment of Anthropology, Department of Biology, Center for Studies in Demography and Ecology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.
Simon VerhulstGroningen Institute for Evolutionary Life Sciences, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Stacy DruryDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, School of Medicine, Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana, United States of America.

Funding

Elucidating the measurement of telomeres: Development of a transdisciplinary, high-impact Telomere Research NetworkU24AG066528 · NIA · TULANE UNIVERSITY OF LOUISIANA · PI DRURY, STACY SCHMIDT · 2019 to 2023
$3.0M
NIA NIH HHS U24 AG066528
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Use of telomere length (TL) as a biomarker for various environmental exposures and diseases has increased in recent years. Various methods have been developed to measure telomere length. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based methods remain wide-spread for population-based studies due to the high-throughput capability. While several studies have evaluated the repeatability and reproducibility of different TL measurement methods, the results have been variable. We conducted a literature review of TL measurement cross-method comparison studies that included a PCR-based method published between January 1, 2002 and May 25, 2020. A total of 25 articles were found that matched the inclusion criteria. Papers were reviewed for quality of methodologic reporting of sample and DNA quality, PCR assay characteristics, sample blinding, and analytic approaches to determine final TL. Overall, methodologic reporting was low as assessed by two different reporting guidelines for qPCR-based TL measurement. There was a wide range in the reported correlation between methods (as assessed by Pearson's r) and few studies utilized the recommended intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) for assessment of assay repeatability and methodologic comparisons. The sample size for nearly all studies was less than 100, raising concerns about statistical power. Overall, this review found that the current literature on the relation between TL measurement methods is lacking in validity and scientific rigor. In light of these findings, we present reporting guidelines for PCR-based TL measurement methods and results of analyses of the effect of assay repeatability (ICC) on statistical power of cross-sectional and longitudinal studies. Additional cross-laboratory studies with rigorous methodologic and statistical reporting, adequate sample size, and blinding are essential to accurately determine assay repeatability and replicability as well as the relation between TL measurement methods.

Indexed as

Guidelines as TopicPolymerase Chain ReactionReference StandardsReproducibility of ResultsResearch DesignTelomere

Identifiers

PMID33471860
PMCPMC7817045

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.