ArticleSaudi journal of biological sciences2022
Comparison between the recovery rate of three concentration protocols of water samples intended for analysis by Molecular Biology: Membrane filtration, filtration on gauze pad and centrifugation.
Article in Saudi journal of biological sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative analysis of wastewater sample processing methods for antimicrobial resistance surveillance.Microbiology spectrum · 2026Article
- Separating pathogens from drinking water and food using magnetic nanomaterials: opportunities and challenges.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2026Review
- Evaluation of an Automated Ultrafiltration System for Concentrating a Range of Viruses from Saline Waters.Food and environmental virology · 2024Article
- Culture-independent identification of bloodstream infections from whole blood: prospective evaluation in specimens of known infection status.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2024Article
- Anti-protozoal potential of electrospun polymeric nanofiber composite membranes for treatment of contaminated drinking water.Pathogens and global healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The presence of microorganisms (bacteria, protozoa, viruses, etc.) in water is a crucial indicator of its quality and safety. The detection of these microorganisms by conventional and classical techniques is widely used in water quality control laboratories; nevertheless these methods have limitations in terms of rapidity and precision of results. The use of Molecular Biology has been a great evolution in the techniques of water analysis. However, the choice of the concentration protocol allowing for the best rate of microorganism recovery in a suspension remains a real challenge. The objective of this experimental study is to compare the recovery rate of three different protocols of water concentration (membrane filtration, filtration on gauze pad and centrifugation) for samples intended for analysis by polymerase chain reaction PCR. Which can then serve as a reference protocol for water quality control laboratories. The experimental results have shown that the membrane filtration protocol yields the best recovery rate and concentration of microorganisms followed by filtration on gauze pad, while the centrifugation protocol (8000
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.