Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19396954›Full record

ReviewFEMS microbiology reviews2009

Pilin gene variation in Neisseria gonorrhoeae: reassessing the old paradigms.

Stuart A Hill, John K Davies

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in FEMS microbiology reviews, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Gonorrhea - an evolving disease of the new millennium.Microbial cell (Graz, Austria) · 2016
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Mini-review: Strategies for Variation and Evolution of Bacterial Antigens.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2015
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Type IV pilin proteins: versatile molecular modules.Microbiology and molecular biology reviews : MMBR · 2012
    Review
  20. 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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Stuart A HillDepartment of Biological Sciences, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, 60115, USA. sahill@niu.edu
John K Davies
Monash University · AUNorthern Illinois University · US

Funding

pilE mRNA Analysis in GonococciR15AI072720 · NIAID · NORTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY · PI HILL, STUART A · 2007 to 2007
$208k
NIAID NIH HHS 1R15 AI072720-01A1NIAID NIH HHS R15 AI072720
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Neisseria gonorrhoeae displays considerable potential for antigenic variation as shown in human experimental studies. Various surface antigens can change either by antigenic variation using RecA-dependent recombination schemes (e.g. PilE antigenic variation) or, alternatively, through phase variation (on/off switching) in a RecA-independent fashion (e.g. Opa and lipooligosaccharide phase variation). PilE antigenic variation has been well documented over the years. However, with the availability of the N. gonorrhoeae FA1090 genome sequence, considerable genetic advances have recently been made regarding the mechanistic considerations of the gene conversion event, leading to an altered PilE protein. This review will compare the various models that have been presented and will highlight potential mechanistic problems that may constrain any genetic model for pilE gene variation.

Indexed as

Antigenic VariationFimbriae ProteinsHumansModels, BiologicalNeisseria gonorrhoeaeRecombination, GeneticFimbriae ProteinspilE protein, Neisseria gonorrhoeae

Identifiers

PMID19396954
PMCPMC2753986
OpenAlexW2130421970

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.