Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42014454›Full record

ReviewNature microbiology2026

Navigating multi-omic integration methods for human microbiome research.

Efrat Muller, Tal Bamberger, Elhanan Borenstein

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature microbiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Efrat Muller *Blavatnik School of Computer Science and AI, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Tal Bamberger *Department of Human Genetics and Computational Medicine, Gray Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Elhanan BorensteinBlavatnik School of Computer Science and AI, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel. elbo@tauex.tau.ac.il.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3002-0945

Funding

The Dog Aging Project: Genetic and Environmental Determinants of Healthy Aging in Companion Dogs Competitive RevisionU19AG057377 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI KEENE, CHRISTOPHER DIRK, PROMISLOW, DANIEL EDWARD · 2018 to 2023
$29.0M
Israel Science Foundation (ISF) 2266/25U.S. Department of Health & Human Services | NIH | National Institute on Aging (U.S. National Institute on Aging) U19AG057377
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Multi-omic studies in human microbiome research hold great potential for advancing our understanding of host-microbiome interactions. However, despite the growing availability of multi-omic datasets, analysing such data remains a major conceptual, analytical and computational challenge. Introduction of new multi-omic integration methods to address these challenges further complicates researchers' efforts to navigate this expanding field. In this Review, we outline the landscape of multi-omic integration methods in the context of human microbiome research. In contrast to previous reviews, we specifically emphasize the different biological questions addressed by various integration approaches, including questions related to interactions between different molecular layers, molecular shifts that occur in disease, subgrouping of patients based on molecular profiles, and identification of biological mechanisms that underlie such associations. Our aim is to provide a timely, convenient and comprehensive resource for the microbiome research community, allowing researchers to identify the multi-omic integration approach that is best suited to their data and objectives.

Indexed as

MicrobiotaMultiomicsComputational BiologyHost Microbial InteractionsHumans

Identifiers

PMID42014454

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.