Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37695473›Full record

ReviewMolecular biotechnology2024

Nucleic Acid Based Testing (NABing): A Game Changer Technology for Public Health.

Harvinder Kour Khera, Rakesh Mishra

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Molecular biotechnology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Harvinder Kour KheraTata Institute for Genetics and Society, New inStem Building NCBS Campus, GKVK Post, Bellary Road, Bengaluru, 560065, India. harvinder.khera@tigs.res.in.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3292-5193
Rakesh MishraTata Institute for Genetics and Society, New inStem Building NCBS Campus, GKVK Post, Bellary Road, Bengaluru, 560065, India. rakesh.mishra@tigs.res.in.
Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology · INInstitute for Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Timely and accurate detection of the causal agent of a disease is crucial to restrict suffering and save lives. Mere symptoms are often not enough to detect the root cause of the disease. Better diagnostics applied for screening at a population level and sensitive detection assays remain the crucial component of disease surveillance which may include clinical, plant, and environmental samples, including wastewater. The recent advances in genome sequencing, nucleic acid amplification, and detection methods have revolutionized nucleic acid-based testing (NABing) and screening assays. A typical NABing assay consists of three modules: isolation of the nucleic acid from the collected sample, identification of the target sequence, and final reading the target with the help of a signal, which may be in the form of color, fluorescence, etc. Here, we review current NABing assays covering the different aspects of all three modules. We also describe the frequently used target amplification or signal amplification procedures along with the variety of applications of this fast-evolving technology and challenges in implementation of NABing in the context of disease management especially in low-resource settings.

Indexed as

Nucleic Acid Amplification TechniquesHumansMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesNucleic AcidsPublic HealthNucleic AcidsBiosensorsDiagnosticsLAMPLateral flow assayNucleic acid detectionPCRRPART-PCRSurveillance

Identifiers

PMID37695473
OpenAlexW4386593328

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.