ArticleFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology2025
Innovative nucleic acid detection of
Article in Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Signal-Analytics Modeling of Fluorescence Time-to-Detection forACS omega · 2026Article
- CRISPR-Cas-Based Diagnostics in Biomedicine: Principles, Applications, and Future Trajectories.Biosensors · 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
Introduction: Methods: Here, we developed PAM-unconventional, One-step LAMP/CRISPR-Cas12b (POLC) detection platforms for the toxin-encoding genes Results: The POLC platforms operated at 60 °C, enabling result interpretation either through fluorescence intensity measurements or direct visualization under UV light. The limits of detection (LoDs) ranged from 3 to 14 copies/μL using a fluorescence reader and from 6 to 18 copies/μL via direct observation. Compared to qPCR, which typically requires over an hour, the POLC platforms reduced the detection time to approximately 40 minutes. Each reaction cost approximately USD 6.5, offering a substantial cost saving compared to qPCR-based commercial kits (over USD 10 per test). In clinical validation with 55 fecal samples, the Discussion: Our research presents innovative CRISPR-based one-step nucleic acid detection platforms that eliminate canonical PAM sequence requirements. These platforms exhibit high sensitivity and specificity while achieving rapid detection under simple conditions, making them promising candidates for clinical diagnostics and point-of-care testing (POCT).
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.