ArticleIndian journal of clinical biochemistry : IJCB2025
Genomic DNA Extraction from Different Human Tissue Sample: Urine, Oral Gargle, Blood, and Cervical for Real Time Amplification by qPCR.
Article in Indian journal of clinical biochemistry : IJCB, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Evaluating different samples & techniques for hr-HPV DNA genotyping to improve the efficiency of risk profiling for oral & cervical cancers in Sikkim, India.The Indian journal of medical research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Molecular technologies have been a driver of rapid paradigm shift in the field of scientific research and clinical applications. Adequate and pure form of nucleic acid extracted from efficient biological sources together with an easy, simple, standardized protocol, ease of access and acceptability is also a prerequisite for genotyping analysis for different disorders. Urine and oral gargle samples are emerging as a potential source of genomic DNA (gDNA) and may offer a better alternative to existing sources such as blood. This manuscript compares for the first time, the quality and quantity of gDNA extracted manually by standard methods from different biological samples like urine, oral gargle, blood and cervical samples, together. It aimed to assess the feasibility of extracting sufficient gDNA from easily accessible and acceptable samples for amplification. 646 urine, oral, blood and cervical samples were collected from different studies in the department and analyzed. gDNA from blood was extracted by Proteinase K digestion followed by ethanol precipitation, and phenol-chloroform extraction method for urine, oral gargle and cervical specimen. The quantification of isolated gDNA were analyzed in Nano-drop spectrophotometer and 1% Agarose gel electrophoresis for different sample types. Human
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.