ArticleFrontiers in public health2024
Comparison of multiplex PCR capillary electrophoresis assay and PCR-reverse dot blot assay for human papillomavirus DNA genotyping detection in cervical cancer tissue specimens.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A rapid detection system for core virulence and resistance genes in hypervirulentFrontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- A direct multiplex isothermal amplification-reverse dot blot hybridization system for β-thalassemia diagnosis.Annals of hematology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The study aimed to evaluate the positivity rates and genotype distribution of the multiplex PCR capillary electrophoresis (MPCE) and PCR-Reverse Dot Blot (PCR-RDB) assays for human papillomavirus (HPV) detection in cervical cancer tissue specimens, and to explore their detection principles and applications in large-scale population screening. Methods: The MPCE and PCR-RDB assays were performed separately on 425 diagnosed cervical cancer tissue specimens. Subsequently, the results of both assays were compared based on the HPV infection positivity rates and genotype distribution. Results: The overall positive rates of HPV genotypes for the MPCE and PCR-RDB assays were 97.9% and 92.9%, respectively. A Conclusion: To reduce the false-negative rate and improve screening efficiency, the MPCE assay, which targets the oncogenic gene E6/E7 segments, can be extended to the general female population for the early detection, diagnosis, and treatment of cervical cancer.
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.