Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35750699›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

The validity evaluation of different 16srRNA gene primers for helicobacter detection urgently requesting to design new specific primers.

Shaymaa Abdelmalek, Karim Shokry, Wafy Hamed, Mohammed Abdelnaser, Ashraf Aboubakr, Sameh Abou Elenin, Mohamed Ali, Mohamed Mostafa, Mahmoud Abou-Okada

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. IJID regions · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Usefulness of Molecular Methods forInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Article
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

9 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Shaymaa AbdelmalekDepartment of Microbiology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Cairo University, Giza, 11221, Egypt. shaymaa_malek@cu.edu.eg.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3333-7502
Karim ShokryDepartment of Microbiology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Cairo University, Giza, 11221, Egypt.
Wafy HamedDepartment of Microbiology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Sadat City, Sadat City, Egypt.
Mohammed AbdelnaserInternal Medicine and Gastroenterology, Elmaadi Military Medical Hospital, Cairo, Egypt.
Ashraf AboubakrInternal Medicine and Gastroenterology, Elmaadi Military Medical Hospital, Cairo, Egypt.
Sameh Abou EleninInternal Medicine and Gastroenterology, Elmaadi Military Medical Hospital, Cairo, Egypt.
Mohamed AliInternal Medicine and Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Helwan Military Production Hospital, Helwan, Egypt.
Mohamed MostafaInternal Medicine and Gastroenterology, Ahmed Maher Hospital, Cairo, Egypt.
Mahmoud Abou-OkadaAquatic Animal Medicine and Management, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt.
Cairo University · EGMilitary Medical Academy · EGHelwan University · EGResearch Institute of Ophthalmology · EGUniversity of Sadat City · EG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Molecular diagnosis of helicobacters by PCR is simpler, more accurate, and feasible compared to other diagnostic methods. Validity and accuracy are highly dependent on the PCR primer design, diffusion time, and mutation rate of helicobacters. This study aimed to design 16srRNA -specific primers for Helicobacter spp. and H. pylori. Application of comparative statistical analysis of the diagnostic utility of the most available 16srRNA genus-specific primers. The new primers were designed using bioinformatics tools (MAFFT MSA and Gblocks command line). A comparative study was applied on nine genus-specific 16srRNA primers in comparison to the ConsH using in silico and laboratory evaluation. The results demonstrated that the best specificity and sensitivity of the primers designed for this study compared to other primers. The comparative study revealed that the heminested outer/inner primers were the worst. Although H276, 16srRNA(a), HeliS/Heli-nest, and Hcom had acceptable diagnostic utility, false positive and false negative results were obtained. Specificity testing on clinical samples indicated a surprising result; that H. pylori was not the sole enemy that we were looking for, but the Non-Helicobacter pylori Helicobacters should be considered as a real risk prognostic for gastric diseases, consequently, a specific diagnosis and treatment should be developed. This study concluded that our designed primers were the most specific and sensitive in comparison with other primers. In addition, in silico evaluation is not accurate enough for primer assessment and that the laboratory evaluation is mandatory.

Indexed as

HelicobacterHelicobacter InfectionsHelicobacter pyloriStomach DiseasesHumansPolymerase Chain ReactionSensitivity and Specificity

Identifiers

PMID35750699
PMCPMC9232570
OpenAlexW4283372233

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.