Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20846899›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in microbiology2010

Navigating the future of bacterial molecular epidemiology.

Stephen Baker, William P Hanage, Kathryn E Holt

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in microbiology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 61 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Bongkrekic Acid andFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Whole-genome sequencing in outbreak analysis.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2015
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Stephen BakerOxford University Clinical Research Unit, Wellcome Trust Major Overseas Programme, Hospital for Tropical Diseases, 190 Ben Ham Tu, Quan 5, Ho Chi Minh City, Viet Nam. sbaker@oucru.org
William P Hanage
Kathryn E Holt
Oxford University Clinical Research Unit · VNSt Mary's Hospital · GBUniversity of Melbourne · AU

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Technological advances in high-throughput genome sequencing have led to an enhanced appreciation of the genetic diversity found within populations of pathogenic bacteria. Methods based on single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and insertions or deletions (indels) build upon the framework established by multi-locus sequence typing (MLST) and permit a detailed, targeted analysis of variation within related organisms. Robust phylogenetics, when combined with epidemiologically informative data, can be applied to study ongoing temporal and geographical fluctuations in bacterial pathogens. As genome sequencing, SNP detection and geospatial information become more accessible these methods will continue to transform the way molecular epidemiology is used to study populations of bacterial pathogens.

Indexed as

PhylogeographyGenetic VariationINDEL MutationMolecular EpidemiologyMultilocus Sequence TypingPolymorphism, Single NucleotideSalmonella typhiSequence Analysis, DNAStaphylococcal InfectionsTyphoid Fever

Identifiers

PMID20846899
PMCPMC2963795
OpenAlexW2026713032

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.