ReviewJournal of applied microbiology2014
Applications of omics approaches to the development of microbiological risk assessment using RNA virus dose-response models as a case study.
Review in Journal of applied microbiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systems Biology Approaches for Therapeutics Development Against COVID-19.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2020Review
- Rotavirus infection beyond the gut.Infection and drug resistance · 2019Review
- Using thermodynamic parameters to calibrate a mechanistic dose-response for infection of a host by a virus.Microbial risk analysis · 2018Article
- Towards an integrated food safety surveillance system: a simulation study to explore the potential of combining genomic and epidemiological metadata.Royal Society open science · 2017Article
- A proof-of-concept model for the identification of the key events in the infection process with specific reference to Pseudomonas aeruginosa in corneal infections.Infection ecology & epidemiology · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The last decade has seen a huge increase in the amount of 'omics' data available and in our ability to interpret those data. The aim of this paper was to consider how omics techniques can be used to improve and refine microbiological risk assessment, using dose-response models for RNA viruses, with particular reference to norovirus through the oral route as the case study. The dose-response model for initial infection in the gastrointestinal tract is broken down into the component steps at the molecular level and the feasibility of assigning probabilities to each step assessed. The molecular mechanisms are not sufficiently well understood at present to enable quantitative estimation of probabilities on the basis of omics data. At present, the great strength of gene sequence data appears to be in giving information on the distribution and proportion of susceptible genotypes (for example due to the presence of the appropriate pathogen-binding receptor) in the host population rather than in predicting specificities from the amino acid sequences concurrently obtained. The nature of the mutant spectrum in RNA viruses greatly complicates the application of omics approaches to the development of mechanistic dose-response models and prevents prediction of risks of disease progression (given infection has occurred) at the level of the individual host. However, molecular markers in the host and virus may enable more broad predictions to be made about the consequences of exposure in a population. In an alternative approach, comparing the results of deep sequencing of RNA viruses in the faeces/vomitus from donor humans with those from their infected recipients may enable direct estimates of the average probability of infection per virion to be made.
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.