Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27303639›Full record

ReviewF1000Research2016

Members of the genus Burkholderia: good and bad guys.

Leo Eberl, Peter Vandamme

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in F1000Research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 154 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
154citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Genomic Basis of Lifestyle Divergence in Rice-AssociatedInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Functional analysis ofMicrobiology spectrum · 2026
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Antibodies toMicroorganisms · 2026
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Biological control ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2026
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

94 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

2 authors.

Leo EberlDepartment of Plant and Microbial Biology, University Zürich, Zurich, CH-8008, Switzerland.
Peter VandammeLaboratory of Microbiology, Ghent University, Ledeganckstraat 35, B-9000 Gent, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the 1990s several biocontrol agents on that contained Burkholderia strains were registered by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). After risk assessment these products were withdrawn from the market and a moratorium was placed on the registration of Burkholderia-containing products, as these strains may pose a risk to human health. However, over the past few years the number of novel Burkholderia species that exhibit plant-beneficial properties and are normally not isolated from infected patients has increased tremendously. In this commentary we wish to summarize recent efforts that aim at discerning pathogenic from beneficial Burkholderia strains.

Identifiers

PMID27303639
PMCPMC4882756

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.