Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37955813›Full record

ReviewJournal, genetic engineering & biotechnology2023

Mastering DNA chromatogram analysis in Sanger sequencing for reliable clinical analysis.

Mohammed Baqur S Al-Shuhaib, Hayder O Hashim

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal, genetic engineering & biotechnology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. First molecular insight intoVeterinary world · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Identification and Phylogenetic Analysis ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Mohammed Baqur S Al-ShuhaibDepartment of Animal Production, College of Agriculture, Al-Qasim Green University, Al-Qasim 8, Babil, 51001, Iraq. mohammed79@agre.uoqasim.edu.iq.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6458-2068
Hayder O HashimDepartment of Clinical Laboratory Sciences, College of Pharmacy, University of Babylon, Babil, 51001, Iraq.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8933-0994

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSanger dideoxy sequencing is vital in clinical analysis due to its accuracy, ability to analyze genetic markers like SNPs and STRs, capability to generate reliable DNA profiles, and its role in resolving complex clinical cases. The precision and robustness of Sanger sequencing contribute significantly to the scientific basis of clinical investigations. Though the reading of chromatograms seems to be a routine step, many errors conducted in PCR may lead to consequent limitations in the readings of AGCT peaks. These errors are possibly associated with improper DNA amplification and its subsequent interpretation of DNA sequencing files, such as noisy peaks, artifacts, and confusion between double-peak technical errors, heterozygosity, and double infection potentials. Thus, it is not feasible to read nucleic acid sequences without giving serious attention to these technical problems. To ensure the accuracy of DNA sequencing outcomes, it is also imperative to detect and rectify technical challenges that may lead to misinterpretation of the DNA sequence, resulting in errors and incongruities in subsequent analyses. SHORT

conclusionThis overview sheds light on prominent technical concerns that can emerge prior to and during the interpretation of DNA chromatograms in Sanger sequencing, along with offering strategies to address them effectively. The significance of identifying and tackling these technical limitations during the chromatogram analysis is underscored in this review. Recognizing these concerns can aid in enhancing the quality of downstream analyses for Sanger sequencing results, which holds notable improvement in accuracy, reliability, and ability to provide crucial genetic information in clinical analysis.

Indexed as

Chromatogram filesElectropherogramsSanger sequencingTechnical issuesTipsTroubleshoot

Identifiers

PMID37955813
PMCPMC10643650

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.