ArticleBiosensors2023
Evaluation of DNA Extraction Methods for Reliable Quantification of
Article in Biosensors, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mutation analysis of dihydrofolate reductase (Iranian journal of microbiology · 2026Article
- Molecular characterization of bovine viral diarrhea virus and host genetic immune and biochemical responses in diarrheic buffalo calves.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Development and evaluation of a hybrid capture-based NGS panel for comprehensive detection of respiratory pathogens.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Iron biomarkers in men with infertility are associated with sperm DNA hydroxymethylation and cumulative live birth rates: a prospective study.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Article
- Genome Sequencing and Comparative Genomic Analysis of Multidrug-ResistantInfection and drug resistance · 2025Article
- Metrological evaluation of DNA extraction method effects on the bacterial microbiome and resistome in sputum.mSystems · 2024Article
- Impeding microbial biofilm formation and Pseudomonas aeruginosa virulence genes using biologically synthesized silver Carthamus nanoparticles.Microbial cell factories · 2024Article
- Whole-genome sequencing ofMicrobiology resource announcements · 2024Article
- A rapid and inexpensive 96-well DNA-extraction method from blood using silicon dioxide powder (Glassmilk).Biology methods & protocols · 2024Article
- Characterization andScience progressArticle
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Detection and quantification of DNA biomarkers relies heavily on the yield and quality of DNA obtained by extraction from different matrices. Although a large number of studies have compared the yields of different extraction methods, the repeatability and intermediate precision of these methods have been largely overlooked. In the present study, five extraction methods were evaluated, using digital PCR, to determine their efficiency in extracting DNA from three different Gram-negative bacteria in sputum samples. The performance of two automated methods (GXT NA and QuickPick genomic DNA extraction kit, using Arrow and KingFisher Duo automated systems, respectively), two manual kit-based methods (QIAamp DNA mini kit; DNeasy UltraClean microbial kit), and one manual non-kit method (CTAB), was assessed. While GXT NA extraction kit and the CTAB method have the highest DNA yield, they did not meet the strict criteria for repeatability, intermediate precision, and measurement uncertainty for all three studied bacteria. However, due to limited clinical samples, a compromise is necessary, and the GXT NA extraction kit was found to be the method of choice. The study also showed that dPCR allowed for accurate determination of extraction method repeatability, which can help standardize molecular diagnostic approaches. Additionally, the determination of absolute copy numbers facilitated the calculation of measurement uncertainty, which was found to be influenced by the DNA extraction method used.
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.