Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17455762›Full record

ReviewScience progress2007

Patho-biotechnology; using bad bugs to make good bugs better.

Roy D Sleator, Colin Hill

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Science progress, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Pathogen-induced secretory diarrhea and its prevention.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2016
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Designer probiotics: Development and applications in gastrointestinal health.World journal of gastrointestinal pathophysiology · 2015
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Probiotics in periodontal health and disease.Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology · 2011
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Rational design of improved pharmabiotics.Journal of biomedicine & biotechnology · 2009
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
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

2 authors.

Roy D SleatorAlimentary Pharmabiotic Centre, Cork, Ireland. R.Sleator@ucc.ie
Colin Hill

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Given the increasing commercial and clinical relevance of probiotic cultures, improving their stress tolerance profile and ability to overcome the physiochemical defences of the host is an important biological goal. Pathogenic bacteria have evolved sophisticated strategies to overcome host defences, interact with the immune system and interfere with essential host systems. We coin the term 'patho-biotechnology' to describe the exploitation of these valuable traits in biotechnology and biomedicine. This approach shows promise for the design of more technologically robust and effective probiotic cultures with improved biotechnological and clinical applications as well as the development of novel vaccine and drug delivery platforms.

Indexed as

AnimalsBiotechnologyDrug Delivery SystemsEscherichia coliGenetic EngineeringHumansListeriaProbioticsVaccinesVirulence FactorsVaccinesVirulence Factors

Identifiers

PMID17455762
PMCPMC10361160

What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.