ReviewJournal of biochemical and molecular toxicology2022
CRISPR-based point-of-care diagnostics incorporating Cas9, Cas12, and Cas13 enzymes advanced for SARS-CoV-2 detection.
Review in Journal of biochemical and molecular toxicology, 2022. 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.
- An overview of CRISPR-artificial intelligence theranostics: Current and emerging applications.Biomaterials translational · 2026Review
- Anti-RNA virus crRNA targets efficient screening platform based on bioinformatics and CRISPR detection.Molecular therapy. Nucleic acids · 2025Article
- Advancing Cholangiocarcinoma Diagnosis: The Role of Liquid Biopsy and CRISPR/Cas Systems in Biomarker Detection.Cancers · 2025Review
- CRISPR detection of cardiac tumor-associated microRNAs.Molecular biology reports · 2025Review
- CRISPR-epigenetic crosstalk: From bidirectional regulation to therapeutic potential.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2025Review
- CRISPR/Cas system and its application in the diagnosis of animal infectious diseases.FASEB journal : official publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology · 2024Review
- Blazing the trail for innovative tuberculosis diagnostics.Infection · 2024Review
- Real-time detection of Seneca Valley virus by one-tube RPA-CRISPR/Cas12a assay.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2023Article
- CRISPR-based point-of-care diagnostics incorporating Cas9, Cas12, and Cas13 enzymes advanced for SARS-CoV-2 detection.Journal of biochemical and molecular toxicology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
An outbreak of the novel beta coronavirus severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) first came to light in December 2019, which has unfolded rapidly and turned out to be a global pandemic. Early prognosis of viral contamination involves speedy intervention, disorder control, and good-sized management of the spread of disease. Reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction, considered the gold standard test for detecting nucleic acids and pathogen diagnosis, provides high sensitivity and specificity. However, reliance on high-priced equipped kits, associated reagents, and skilled personnel slow down sickness detection. Lately, the improvement of clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeat (CRISPR)-Cas (CRISPR-associated protein)-based diagnostic systems has reshaped molecular diagnosis due to their low cost, simplicity, speed, efficiency, high sensitivity, specificity, and versatility, which is vital for accomplishing point-of-care diagnostics. We reviewed and summarized CRISPR-Cas-based point-of-care diagnostic strategies and research in these paintings while highlighting their characteristics and challenges for identifying 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.