ArticleBiochemistry and molecular biology education : a bimonthly publication of the International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
Determination of Thermal DNA-Stability With Respect to PCR or How to Debunk a Pseudoscientific Claim.
Article in Biochemistry and molecular biology education : a bimonthly publication of the International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology. 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.
- Determination of Thermal DNA-Stability With Respect to PCR or How to Debunk a Pseudoscientific Claim.Biochemistry and molecular biology education : a bimonthly publication of the International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular BiologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Debunking pseudoscience is difficult, especially for early-career students and the public. Recently, in particular the Corona pandemic has spawned a whole range of pseudoscientific claims and conspiracy theories, many of which are publicly available in the style of scientific articles on preprint servers, in predatory journals, or in some cases even as regular scientific papers making it difficult to distinguish scientific papers from pseudoscience. One example is a recently published paper claiming that PCR is unreliable because DNA is thermolabile. While experts have the skills to recognize such pseudoscience, inexperienced early-career students usually have few chances to critically evaluate such claims. Here, we present some simple experiments that combine several aspects: (I) the analysis of a seemingly reputable publication, (II) planning experiments on the physicochemistry of DNA, (III) conducting and analyzing these experiments, and finally (IV) the refutation of the claim that PCR is unreliable. These experiments can be carried out in any standard laboratory with basic molecular biology equipment. They are therefore suitable for undergraduate programs and for high school courses. The model case described here enables students to critically evaluate these claims through practical investigations and to form their own informed opinion. The participants gained new insights into the planning of experiments and a completely new perspective on the subject of science and pseudoscience.
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.