ArticleScientific reports2025
Streamlining whole genome sequencing for clinical diagnostics with ONT technology.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The transformative impact of ultra-rapid nanopore sequencing in precision medicine.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Applications of Genome Sequencing in Infectious Diseases: From Pathogen Identification to Precision Medicine.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Development of a 5K Liquid-Phase Genome-Wide Breeding Chip for Xinglong Buffalo.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
- Rapid assessment of clinical severity for salmonellosis cases via protein family domain analysis and machine learning.Academia molecular biology and genomics · 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Recent advances in whole-genome sequencing (WGS) have increased the accessibility of this tool, offering substantial potential for pathogen surveillance, outbreak response, and diagnostics. However, the routine clinical adoption of WGS is hindered by factors such as high costs, technical complexity, and the requirement for bioinformatics expertise for data analysis. To address these challenges, we propose RapidONT, a workflow designed for cost-effective and accessible WGS-based pathogen analysis. RapidONT employs a mechanical shearing-based DNA extraction protocol, followed by library construction by using a multiplexing Oxford nanopore technologies (ONT) rapid barcoding kit. Flye software is used for de novo assembly without manual intervention, followed by basic assembly polishing using Medaka and Homopolish. The polished assemblies are then analyzed using the user-friendly web-based platform Pathogenwatch, which facilitates species identification, molecular typing, and antimicrobial resistance (AMR) prediction, all while requiring minimal bioinformatics expertise. The efficacy of RapidONT was evaluated using nine clinically relevant pathogens, encompassing a total of 90 gram-positive and gram-negative bacterial strains. The workflow demonstrated high accuracy in critical tasks such as multilocus sequence typing (MLST) and AMR identification, using only ONT R9.4.1 flowcell data. Notably, limitations were observed with Salmonella spp. and Neisseria gonorrhoeae. Furthermore, RapidONT enabled the generation of genomic information for 48 bacterial isolates by using a single flow cell, significantly reducing sequencing costs. This approach eliminates the need for extensive experimentation in obtaining crucial genomic information. This workflow facilitates broader WGS implementation in clinical pathogen analysis and diagnostics.
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.