ReviewAdvances in applied microbiology2013
Bacterial volatiles and diagnosis of respiratory infections.
Review in Advances in applied microbiology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Volatile Organic Compounds in the Early Diagnosis of Non-healing Surgical Wounds: A Systematic Review.World journal of surgery · 2022Pooled it
- Application of Volatilome Analysis to the Diagnosis of Mycobacteria Infection in Livestock.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2021Review
- Validation of biofilm formation on human skin wound models and demonstration of clinically translatable bacteria-specific volatile signatures.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Metal Oxide Gas Sensors, a Survey of Selectivity Issues Addressed at the SENSOR Lab, Brescia (Italy).Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2017Review
- Microbial biosynthesis of medium-chain 1-alkenes by a nonheme iron oxidase.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Breath testing has enormous potential in the medical diagnostic field. The underlying complexity and perceived availability of adequate specimens, combined with a lack of knowledge of the metabolic pathways that give rise to compounds that are sources of analytes detectable in breath, has greatly slowed development. These real obstacles have recently been largely overcome in the use of breath testing to identify patients with cystic fibrosis associated Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection and tuberculosis. This review summarizes progress made in the characterization of microbial volatiles produced by major lower respiratory tract bacterial pathogens, and their potential use as diagnostic markers in patient breath testing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.