ReviewCurrent clinical microbiology reports2025
Long-Read Sequencing for the Rapid Response to Infectious Diseases Outbreaks.
Review in Current clinical microbiology reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Syndromic cholera diagnosis masks diverse causes of diarrhoeal disease in Burundi revealed by portable metagenomics.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2026Article
- Ebola Virus Disease in the Era of One Health and Global Preparedness: Evolving Epidemiology, Genomic Surveillance, and Future Challenges.Infectious disease reports · 2026Review
- Benchmarking next- versus third-generation sequencing in metagenomics: performance metrics and diagnostic efficacy.Microbiology spectrum · 2026Article
- Article
- Current status and prospects of nanopore sequencing technology in the detection of pathogenic microorganisms.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Review
- Comparative Evaluation of Sequencing Technologies for Detecting Antimicrobial Resistance in Bloodstream Infections.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Applications of Genome Sequencing in Infectious Diseases: From Pathogen Identification to Precision Medicine.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Computational Metagenomics: State of the Art.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Polymicrobial Biofilms: Interkingdom Interactions, Resistance and Therapeutic Strategies.Microbial biotechnology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose of Review: Long-read sequencing (LRS) has revolutionized pathogen surveillance by enabling real-time, high-fidelity genomic analysis critical for outbreak response. This review synthesizes recent breakthroughs in LRS, evaluating its impact on genomic epidemiology, metagenomics, and public health decision-making while addressing limitations and prospects for integrating LRS into global outbreak surveillance. Recent Findings: Unlike short-read sequencing, LRS-pioneered by Oxford Nanopore Technologies (ONT) and Pacific Biosciences (PacBio)-resolves complex genomic structures, antimicrobial resistance determinants, and transmission dynamics with unprecedented accuracy. The portability of some LRS devices has facilitated rapid pathogen identification in field settings, notably during the Ebola and COVID-19 pandemics. Despite advancements in basecalling algorithms and target enrichment, challenges including sequencing errors, computational bottlenecks, and cost barriers remain. Summary: By critically evaluating recent findings and discussing future directions, this review highlights the importance of leveraging LRS for outbreak preparedness and response, equipping researchers and public health professionals with the knowledge necessary to navigate the complexities of modern infectious disease challenges.
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.