ReviewFrontiers in medicine2020
Blood Metagenome in Health and Psoriasis.
Review in Frontiers in medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
A survey and analytical assessment of the results of fundamental works on studying blood metagenome (set of all non-human DNA) is carried out. All works on determining bacterial DNA concentration in the whole blood of healthy people are reviewed. Detailed comparison of characteristics of 16S rRNA test (hereinafter 16S-test) and whole metagenome sequencing test (hereinafter WMS-test) is carried out and published in Supplement S1. One of main goals of this review is to identify the drawbacks and mistakes which the studied works contain, particularly to emphasize the crucial importance of determining total concentration of bacterial DNA for comparing patients' metagenomes with those of healthy people as well as for comparing patients' metagenomes with each other. Controlling the level and composition of contamination is equally important. The absence of high-quality contamination control at each step (or at certain steps) of the research significantly reduces the reliability of achieved results. The given review is the first attempt to analyze and systematize the results of blood metagenome studies, whose number has increased considerably in the last few years. The review has been carried out as part of preparation for implementing a project on complex studying metagenomes of whole blood and skin biopsies of psoriatic patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.