Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21233508›Full record

ReviewClinical microbiology reviews2011

Challenges of antibacterial discovery.

Lynn L Silver

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical microbiology reviews, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 559 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
559citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

559 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Structural insights into multitargetingMicrobiology spectrum · 2026
    Article
  8. Bioactive Coatings with Antimicrobial Activity fromMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Baloxavir Exhibits Antibacterial Activity AgainstInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Article
  20. Article

499 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

1 author.

Lynn L SilverLL Silver Consulting, LLC, 955 S. Springfield Ave., Unit C403, Springfield, NJ 07081, USA. silverly@comcast.net

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The discovery of novel small-molecule antibacterial drugs has been stalled for many years. The purpose of this review is to underscore and illustrate those scientific problems unique to the discovery and optimization of novel antibacterial agents that have adversely affected the output of the effort. The major challenges fall into two areas: (i) proper target selection, particularly the necessity of pursuing molecular targets that are not prone to rapid resistance development, and (ii) improvement of chemical libraries to overcome limitations of diversity, especially that which is necessary to overcome barriers to bacterial entry and proclivity to be effluxed, especially in Gram-negative organisms. Failure to address these problems has led to a great deal of misdirected effort.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsDrug DiscoveryDrug Resistance, BacterialHumansAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID21233508
PMCPMC3021209

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.