Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23062738›Full record

ReviewVirology2012

Computational tools for viral metagenomics and their application in clinical research.

L Fancello, D Raoult, C Desnues

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Virology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Computational Tools for the Analysis of Uncultivated Phage Genomes.Microbiology and molecular biology reviews : MMBR · 2022
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Enteric Virome and Carcinogenesis in the Gut.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2020
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Assessing Species Diversity Using Metavirome Data: Methods and Challenges.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2017
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  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.

L FancelloAix Marseille University, URMITE, UM63, CNRS 7278, IRD 198, Inserm 1095, 13005 Marseille, France.
D Raoult
C Desnues

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There are 100 times more virions than eukaryotic cells in a healthy human body. The characterization of human-associated viral communities in a non-pathological state and the detection of viral pathogens in cases of infection are essential for medical care and epidemic surveillance. Viral metagenomics, the sequenced-based analysis of the complete collection of viral genomes directly isolated from an organism or an ecosystem, bypasses the "single-organism-level" point of view of clinical diagnostics and thus the need to isolate and culture the targeted organism. The first part of this review is dedicated to a presentation of past research in viral metagenomics with an emphasis on human-associated viral communities (eukaryotic viruses and bacteriophages). In the second part, we review more precisely the computational challenges posed by the analysis of viral metagenomes, and we illustrate the problem of sequences that do not have homologs in public databases and the possible approaches to characterize them.

Indexed as

BiotaMetagenomeBiomedical ResearchComputational BiologyEnvironmental MicrobiologyHumansMetagenomicsViruses

Identifiers

PMID23062738
PMCPMC7111993

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.