ArticleScientific reports2025
Optimization of the real-time PCR platform method using high-resolution melting analysis and comparison with sequencing and phylogenetic analysis for developing optimal malaria diagnostic methods.
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 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.
- Performance of High-Resolution Melting Analysis for Molecular Detection and Species Differentiation of Malaria: A Scoping Review.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- High-resolution melting (HRM)-based genotyping of Toxoplasma gondii in meat products: comparative evaluation of ROP18, ROP5, and B1 gene markers.World journal of microbiology & biotechnology · 2026Article
- Avian Candidiasis: A Comprehensive Review of Pathogenesis, Diagnosis, and Control.Veterinary sciences · 2026Review
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
Malaria significantly impacts public health in developing countries. Accurate identification of Plasmodium species, which can cause chronic infections lasting months or years, is crucial for reducing infection rates. Despite the global availability of various diagnostic methods, challenges remain compared to the microscopic slide detection method. Molecular techniques, while more sensitive, are generally more expensive than microscopy but offer greater accuracy and automation potential in clinical settings. This study aims to optimize the real-time PCR platform method using high-resolution melting (HRM) analysis technology and compare the results with sequencing and phylogenetic analyses to develop optimal malaria diagnostic methods. A total of 300 samples were collected from individuals with suspected malaria symptoms in various regions of Sistan and Baluchistan province, located in southeastern Iran. Peripheral blood slides were examined microscopically and analyzed using PCR HRM with the Light Cycler 96 Instrument (Roche). Subsequently, phylogenetic analysis was conducted to further analyze the sequencing, with the desired sequences submitted to GenBank. Out of the 300 suspected samples, the PCR method identified 9 cases (3%) of Plasmodium falciparum and 20 cases (6.66%) of Plasmodium vivax. In comparison, the HRM method detected 15 cases (5%) of Plasmodium falciparum and 14 cases (4.66%) of Plasmodium vivax. Sequencing results revealed 13 cases (4.33%) of Plasmodium falciparum and 16 cases (5.33%) of Plasmodium vivax. The HRM method targeted the 18S SSU rRNA region, achieving a significant differentiation of 2.73 degrees to distinguish between the two species. The results confirm that, with proper primer design and precise species separation, the HRM technique is a reliable and optimal method for diagnosing malaria species. Also, The HRM method showed high sensitivity and specificity in identifying Plasmodium species, with complete agreement observed with sequencing in the tested samples.
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.