CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 16,317Molecular Biology Techniques and ApplicationsMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsAcademic Writing and Publishing

The MIQE guidelines: minimum information for publication of quantitative real-time PCR experiments

Open access
Bustin, Stephen A, Benes, Vladimir, Garson, Jeremy A, Hellemans, Jan, Huggett, Jim, Kubista, Mikael, Mueller, Reinhold, Nolan, Tania +4 more·2009·Clinical Chemistry
DOI 10.1373/clinchem.2008.112797
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Background: Currently, a lack of consensus exists on how best to perform and interpret quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) experiments. The problem is exacerbated by a lack of sufficient experimental detail in many publications, which impedes a reader’s ability to evaluate critically the quality of the results presented or to repeat the experiments. Content: The Minimum Information for Publication of Quantitative Real-Time PCR Experiments (MIQE) guidelines target the reliability of results to help ensure the integrity of the scientific literature, promote consistency between laboratories, and increase experimental transparency. MIQE is a set of guidelines that describe the minimum information necessary for evaluating qPCR experiments. Included is a checklist to accompany the initial submission of a manuscript to the publisher. By providing all relevant experimental conditions and assay characteristics, reviewers can assess the validity of the protocols used. Full disclosure of all reagents, sequences, and analysis methods is necessary to enable other investigators to reproduce results. MIQE details should be published either in abbreviated form or as an online supplement. Summary: Following these guidelines will encourage better experimental practice, allowing more reliable and unequivocal interpretation of qPCR results.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1373/clinchem.2008.112797

Cites

92 of 92 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

19 of 46 cited sources checked · 13 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured

  • Premisecitation

    If multiple reactions are performed, accurate quantification of lower concentrations can be obtained via digital PCR.

    “If multiple reactions are performed, however, accurate quantification of lower concentrations can be obtained via digital PCR (29,63,64 )”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim2 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [29] 2008, Nat Protoc source
    • cites [63] 2008, PLoS ONE source
    • cites [64] 1999, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A source
  • Interpretationreasoning

    Many molecular analyses still contain qPCR data that are poorly normalized.

    “Consequently, many molecular analyses still contain qPCR data that are poorly normalized.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [70] 2008, Plant Biotechnol J source
  • Premisecitation

    The lack of concordance between mRNA and protein concentrations is particularly true for mRNAs specifying proteins that are part of multifunction protein complexes.

    “which is particularly true for mRNAs that specify proteins that are part of multifunction protein complexes (37 ).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [37] 2007, Mol Syst Biol source

      The Functional pathway analysis reports very low or negative protein–mRNA correlations for most multisubunit protein complexes, supporting the claim of poor concordance for their subunits. It does not establish that these complexes are multifunctional; that qualifier differs from the paper’s “multisubunit.” (LLM, conf=0.82)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Premisecitation

    Splicing variants specify alternative protein isoforms.

    “these splicing variants specify alternative protein isoforms”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [31] 2007, BMC Bioinformatics source
    • cites [32] 2008, J Biol Chem source
  • Premisecitation

    qPCR data-analysis methods differ substantially in performance.

    “a systematic evaluation has revealed that qPCR data-analysis methods differ substantially in their performance (68 )”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [68] 2007, BMC Bioinformatics source
  • May combine two claims. 12
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 6

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Only a few interlaboratory comparisons of qPCR diagnostic assays have been performed, and they emphasized the need for standardization.

    “only a couple of interlaboratory comparisons have been performed, and both of these studies emphasized the need for standardization of qPCR diagnostic assays (44,45 ).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [44] 2006, Clin Chem source
    • cites [45] 2008, J Clin Microbiol source

      The discussion (p. 4) describes this study as the first international evaluation of HIV-2 RNA quantification assays and says the collaboration is working toward standardization because results varied between laboratories. It does not establish that only a couple of interlaboratory comparisons of qPCR diagnostic assays had been performed generally. (LLM, conf=0.85)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    In practice, qPCR is not a fixed gold standard; its standard is variable, and reporting results requires sophisticated analysis and interpretation.

    “although qPCR has frequently been proclaimed a touchstone or a gold standard, in practice this “standard” is a variable one, and the reporting of results requires considerable sophistication of analysis and interpretation (43 ).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [43] 2005, J Mol Endocrinol source
    • Rests on an assumption: A large part of the variance in reported RT-qPCR expression values comes from data-processing algorithm corrections rather than solely from protocol variation.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Most human genes and many genes in other multicellular organisms have alternatively spliced transcripts.

    “The transcripts of most human genes and many genes in other multicellular organisms are alternatively spliced (31,32 ),”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [31] 2007, BMC Bioinformatics source

      The Utility section reports that 61% of the human genes in the database were estimated to undergo alternative splicing, supporting the claim about most human genes. The passages found do not establish the claim about genes in other multicellular organisms; the paper’s analysis here concerns human genes. (LLM, conf=0.86)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [32] 2008, J Biol Chem source

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    There is increased awareness of the importance of systematic validation and the potentially misleading effects of inappropriate reference genes are widely known, but these considerations are still widely disregarded.

    “Unfortunately, although there is an increased awareness of the importance of systematic validation and although the potentially highly misleading effects of the use of inappropriate reference genes for normalization are widely known, these considerations also are still widely disregarded (70 ).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [70] 2008, Plant Biotechnol J source

      The Introduction (page not provided) says that improperly validated reference genes remained widely used in plant RT-PCR and that their use may lead to misinterpretation; the paper also demonstrates a misleading normalization result. But it says the importance of earlier findings did not appear to have been recognized, rather than establishing increased awareness or that the risks were widely known. (LLM, conf=0.86)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Alternative, more generalized quantitative models have been developed to correct for differences in amplification efficiency and to allow the use of multiple reference genes.

    “alternative, more generalized quantitative models have been developed to correct for differences in amplification efficiency (62 ) and to allow the use of multiple reference genes (30 ).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim2 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [62] 2001, Nucleic Acids Res source
    • cites [30] 2007, Genome Biol source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    The necessity for ensuring quality-assurance measures for qPCR and RT-qPCR assays is well recognized.

    “The necessity for ensuring quality-assurance measures for qPCR and RT-qPCR assays is well recognized (25,44,(75)(76)(77)(78)(79)(80)(81)(82)(83)(84)(85)(86).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [25] 2006, BMC Biotechnol source

      The Background (page unavailable) describes measures to improve the reliability of low-level DNA quantification by qPCR. The methods section headed “Reverse primer” (page unavailable) also reports contamination controls and checks on standard-curve quality. These support the need for quality assurance in qPCR, but the paper does not address reverse-transcription qPCR (RT-qPCR). (LLM, conf=0.86)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [44] 2006, Clin Chem source
    • cites [75] 2005, J Clin Microbiol source

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Arbitrary Cq cutoffs are not ideal because they may be too low, eliminating valid results, or too high, increasing false-positive results.

    “however, the use of such arbitrary C q cutoffs is not ideal, because they may be either too low (eliminating valid results) or too high (increasing false-positive results) (26 )”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [26] 2008, Eur Food Res Technol source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Knowledge of the presence and function of specific microRNAs is as important to understanding gene expression as quantifying mRNA species.

    “knowledge of the presence and function of specific microRNAs is as important to understanding gene expression as being able to quantify the mRNA species (38 ).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [38] 2008, Carcinogenesis

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    When PCR efficiencies differ, calculations of relative concentrations are inaccurate and yield misleading results.

    “calculations of relative concentrations will be inaccurate, yielding misleading results.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Single exon-based RT-qPCR assays may detect multiple splice variants, whereas intron-spanning primers may be more selective but can miss some splice variants.

    “single exon-based RT-qPCR assays may detect a number of splice variants, whereas intron-spanning primers may be more selective but may miss some splice variants altogether.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Use of a 3':5' integrity assay requires that the PCR efficiencies of both assays be virtually identical and not subject to differential inhibition.

    “Use of a 3Ј:5Ј assay requires that the PCR efficiencies of both assays be virtually identical (51 ) and not be subject to differential inhibition.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [51] 2006, Nat Protoc source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Although differences between biological replicates may be large, sufficient numbers may allow smaller experimental differences to be discerned.

    “Although differences between biological replicates may be large, sufficient numbers may allow smaller experimental differences to be discerned.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The inherent variability of biological systems may rival or exceed experimental differences between groups.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The reference genes or materials used for standardization are critical, and assessing the validity of an RT-qPCR experiment must consider the appropriateness of the relative-quantification reference.

    “Thus, the reference genes or materials used for standardization are critical, and any assessment of the validity of an RT-qPCR experiment must also consider the appropriateness of the relative-quantification reference.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Most quantitative RNA measurements are relative, not absolute.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Different RNA quantification methods produce different results, making comparison of data obtained with different methods unwise.

    “The methods produce different results, making it unwise to try to compare data obtained with the different methods (48 ).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [48] 2005, Expert Rev Mol Diagn source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Power analysis is useful for determining the number of samples necessary for valid conclusions.

    “Consequently, power analysis is useful for determining the number of samples necessary for valid conclusions.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Many factors contribute to experimental variation and influence the number of biological replicates necessary to achieve a given statistical power.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning

    One cannot assume that legacy PCR assays can translate directly into the qPCR format.

    “This difference must be clearly recognized, and one cannot assume that legacy PCR assays can translate directly into the qPCR format.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The main difference between qPCR and conventional PCR is the expectation that qPCR can quantify target nucleic acids accurately.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Investigations that use this widely applied technology will produce data that are more uniform, more comparable, and ultimately more reliable.

    “As a consequence, investigations that use this widely applied technology will produce data that are more uniform, more comparable, and, ultimately, more reliable.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
17 of 17

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Many qPCR publications lack enough experimental detail for readers to assess or repeat the work.

    “The problem is exacerbated by a lack of sufficient experimental detail in many publications, which impedes a reader's ability to evaluate critically the quality of the results presented or to repeat the experiments.”
    “The problem is exacerbated by the lack of information that characterizes most reports of studies that have used this technology, with many publications not providing sufficient experimental detail to permit the reader to critically evaluate the quality of the results presented or to repeat the experiments.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Presence of an mRNA does not establish that it is translated into protein or functional protein.

    “detection of the presence of an mRNA provides no information on whether that mRNA will be translated into a protein or, indeed, whether a functional protein is translated at all.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Most quantitative RNA measurements are relative, not absolute.

    “most quantitative RNA data are not absolute, but relative.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    A large part of the variance in reported RT-qPCR expression values comes from data-processing algorithm corrections rather than solely from protocol variation.

    “Much of the variance in reported expression values produced in RT-qPCR experiments is not simply due to variation in experimental protocols but is caused by corrections applied by various dataprocessing algorithms, each of which makes its own assumptions about the data.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    PCR efficiency is highly dependent on the primers used.

    “PCR efficiency is highly dependent on the primers used”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The structure of the nucleic acid target has a substantial impact on the efficiency of reverse transcription and PCR.

    “The structure of the nucleic acid target (e.g., stem and loop secondary RNA structure) has a substantial impact on the efficiency of reverse transcription and the PCR.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    A marked presence of primer dimers produces lower PCR efficiency in probe-based assays and may generate false positives in SYBR Green I assays.

    “A marked presence of primer dimers produces a lower PCR efficiency in probe-based assays and may generate false positives in assays based on SYBR Green I.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    No-template controls detect PCR contamination when probes are used and can distinguish unintended amplification products from intended products in SYBR Green I reactions.

    “NTCs detect PCR contamination when probes are used and can also distinguish unintended amplification products (e.g., primer dimers) from the intended PCR products in SYBR Green I reactions.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Robust and precise qPCR assays are usually correlated with high PCR efficiency.

    “Robust and precise qPCR assays are usually correlated with high PCR efficiency.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    PCR efficiency is particularly important when reporting mRNA concentrations for target genes relative to reference genes.

    “PCR efficiency is particularly important when reporting mRNA concentrations for target genes relative to those of reference genes.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    A260/A280 measurement is not sufficient for quantitative nucleic acid analysis, especially when measuring minor differences (<10-fold) in cellular mRNA concentrations.

    “such measurement is not sufficient if the nucleic acid is to be used for quantitative analysis, especially when the aim is to measure minor differences (Ͻ10-fold) in cellular mRNA concentrations.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    RNA integrity numbers relate to rRNA quality and cannot be expected to be an absolute measure of RNA quality.

    “these numbers relate to rRNA quality and cannot be expected to be an absolute measure of quality.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The small amplicon size of qPCR assays helps minimize assay-related problems.

    “The small amplicon size of qPCR assays helps to minimize assay-related problems”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Lower limits of quantification are usually poorly defined.

    “Because lower limits of quantification are usually poorly defined, the variation at the lowest concentration claimed to be within the linear interval should be determined.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Low-copy PCRs are stochastically limited.

    “Low-copy PCRs are stochastically limited, and LODs of Ͻ3 copies per PCR are not possible.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Precision in qPCR typically varies with concentration, decreasing with copy number.

    “Precision in qPCR typically varies with concentration, decreasing with the copy number.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Use of reference genes as internal controls is the most common method for normalizing cellular mRNA data.

    “The use of reference genes as internal controls is the most common method for normalizing cellular mRNA data”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The inherent variability of biological systems may rival or exceed experimental differences between groups.

    “The inherent variability of biological systems may rival or exceed experimental differences between groups.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Many factors contribute to experimental variation and influence the number of biological replicates necessary to achieve a given statistical power.

    “Many factors contribute to experimental variation and influence the number of biological replicates necessary to achieve a given statistical power.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The main difference between qPCR and conventional PCR is the expectation that qPCR can quantify target nucleic acids accurately.

    “The main difference between qPCR and conventional (legacy) PCR assays is the expectation of the former's potential to quantify target nucleic acids accurately.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The concern about multiplexing accuracy is particularly important when targets of appreciably lower abundance are coamplified with highly abundant targets.

    “This concern is of particular importance when targets of appreciably lower abundance are coamplified with highly abundant targets.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Reference gene utility must be experimentally validated for particular tissues or cell types and specific experimental designs.

    “their utility must be experimentally validated for particular tissues or cell types and specific experimental designs”
22 of 22

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Gene knockdown and PCR techniques rely upon the correct design and experimental use of RNA targeting reagents and PCR primers.

    “Gene knockdown and PCR techniques rely upon the correct design and experimental use of RNA targeting reagents and PCR primers, respectively [17–19].”

    From Semi-automated fact-checking of nucleotide sequence reagents in biomedical research publications: The Seek &amp; Blastn tool (2019) · cites this paper as [18]

    Section 7.2 (Specificity) supports the PCR-primer part: it says primer specificity must be validated experimentally and poor annealing optimization affects assay quality. The citation is attached to a sentence that also concerns RNA-targeting reagents for gene knockdown, which the cited passages do not address. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Each published reagent descriptor is recommended to be accompanied by its corresponding nucleotide sequence.

    “As the nucleotide sequences of these reagents define their identity and possible experimental use, each published reagent descriptor is recommended to be accompanied by its corresponding nucleotide sequence [18].”

    From Semi-automated fact-checking of nucleotide sequence reagents in biomedical research publications: The Seek &amp; Blastn tool (2019) · cites this paper as [18]

    Section 7 (qPCR; page not provided) requires publication of the sequences of primers and other assay oligonucleotides, including probes. It does not extend that requirement to every published reagent descriptor; the claim is broader than the guideline. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • MIQE guidelines define a rigorous methodology for designing qPCR experiments that assures publication of reproducible and high quality data.

    “The Minimum Information for the Publication of Quantitative Real-Time PCR Experiments (MIQE) guidelines and related articles published thereafter define a rigorous methodology for designing qPCR experiments that assures publication of reproducible and high quality data5–7.”

    From Droplet Digital PCR versus qPCR for gene expression analysis with low abundant targets: from variable nonsense to publication quality data (2017) · cites this paper as [5]

    The Conclusions describe a checklist intended to help authors design and report qPCR experiments and enable others to reproduce them. The Abstract says following MIQE will encourage better practice and more reliable results; it does not guarantee that published data will be reproducible and high quality. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The qPCR method was optimized until the standard curve fitted qPCR standard guidelines (amplification efficiency 100 ± 10% and R2 > 0.95).

    “The qPCR method was optimized until the characteristics of the standard curve fitted qPCR standard guidelines32 (amplification efficiency (E) = 100 ± 10% and the coefficient of correlation (R2) > 0.95).”

    From An apicomplexan parasite drives the collapse of the bay scallop population in New York (2023) · cites this paper as [32]

    Section 7.4.1 says PCR efficiency must be established from calibration curves and identifies 100% as the theoretical maximum. Section 7.4.2 requires reporting calibration-curve r² values. The copy does not specify 100 ± 10% efficiency or r² > 0.95 as guideline thresholds, so the cited paper supports the measures but not the stated cutoffs. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • For qPCR to measure small fold changes, it is essential that some estimation of efficiency is made.

    “it is also essential that some estimation of efficiency is made (25).”

    From Comparison of microfluidic digital PCR and conventional quantitative PCR for measuring copy number variation (2012) · cites this paper as [25]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Self-check results appear here once an independent check has confirmed them.

Cited works that were retracted

Works this paper cites that were later retracted, from the retraction notices publishers deposit. Major when the notice came out before this paper was published.

  • Cites a retracted work: 10.1126/science.1117768

    Major

    The cited work was retracted on 2007-04-20 (notice 10.1126/science.316.5823.367b), before this paper was published (2009-04-01). Its authors could have known.

    Cited work 10.1126/science.1117768 · retracted 2007-04-20 · notice 10.1126/science.316.5823.367b · this paper published 2009-04-01

  • Cites a retracted work: 10.1126/science.316.5823.367b

    Info

    The cited work was retracted; the date of the notice is not on record.

    Cited work 10.1126/science.316.5823.367b · retraction date not known · this paper published 2009-04-01

2 of 2

Cites

2 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. 1993, Biotechnology (N Y), 11, 1026
  2. 2004, J Biomol Tech, 15, 155
  3. 2009, Forthcoming
  4. 2007, Science, 316, 367
  5. 2007, Nat Biotechnol, 25, 846
  6. 2008, Carcinogenesis, 29, 579
  7. 2006, Dev Biol (Basel), 126, 79
  8. 2005, Clin Chem Lab Med, 43, 542

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Bustin, S. A., Benes, V., Garson, J. A., Hellemans, J., Huggett, J., Kubista, M., Mueller, R., Nolan, T., Pfaffl, M. W., Shipley, G. L., Vandesompele, J., & Wittwer, C. T.
Affiliations
  • Queen Mary University of London (GB)
  • Genomics Core Facility, EMBL Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
  • University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
  • Ghent University Hospital (BE)
  • University College London (GB)
  • Czech Academy of Sciences, Institute of Biotechnology (CZ)
  • Sequenom (United States) (US)
  • Sigma–Aldrich, Haverhill, UK
  • Technical University of Munich (DE)
  • The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston (US)
  • University of Utah (US)
Corresponding author
Bustin, Stephen A
ORCID
Venue
Clinical Chemistry
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2009-04-01
Volume
55
Issue
4
Pages
611-622
ISSN
  • 0009-9147 (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-8561
DOI
10.1373/clinchem.2008.112797
OpenAlex
W2168420558
Cited by
16,303
References
92
Citations by year
2026: 1198 · 2025: 1087 · 2024: 1107 · 2023: 1118 · 2022: 1157 · 2021: 1339 · 2020: 1264 · 2019: 1139 · 2018: 1082 · 2017: 1067 · 2016: 991 · 2015: 944 · 2014: 832 · 2013: 704 · 2012: 556
FWCI
168.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model (vor)
Locations
  • Clinical Chemistry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • mediaTUM – the media and publications repository of the Technical University Munich (Technical University Munich) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Bowel and Cancer Research (1119105)
  • ARUP Institute for Clinical and Experimental Pathology
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Academic Writing and Publishing
Keywords
MIQE guidelines, quantitative real-time PCR, reporting guidelines, reproducibility, scientific integrity
MeSH terms
Humans, Terminology as Topic, Nucleic Acids, Publishing, Time Factors, Polymerase Chain Reaction, Molecular Diagnostic Techniques, Reverse Transcription

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-07.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-07.

Cited sources are checked by gpt-6-sol.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review