Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27687858›Full record

ReviewVirulence2017

The lung mycobiome in the next-generation sequencing era.

Laura Tipton, Elodie Ghedin, Alison Morris

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Virulence, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed
–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

41 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. ClinicalJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Revisiting the controversy: The role of fungi in chronic rhinosinusitis.International forum of allergy & rhinology · 2021
    Review
  18. The lung microbiome: progress and promise.The Journal of clinical investigation · 2021
    Review
  19. The lung microbiome in lung transplantation.The Journal of heart and lung transplantation : the official publication of the International Society for Heart Transplantation · 2021
    Review
  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.

Laura Tiptona Department of Computational and Systems Biology , University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine , Pittsburgh , PA , USA.
Elodie Ghedinb Department of Biology , New York University , New York , NY , USA.
Alison Morrisc Departments of Medicine and Immunology , University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine , Pittsburgh , PA , USA.

Funding

Mentoring and Patient-Oriented Research in HIV Obstructive Lung DiseaseK24HL123342 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI MORRIS, ALISON · 2014 to 2018
$571k
NHLBI NIH HHS K24 HL123342
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The fungi that reside in the human lungs represent an understudied, but medically relevant comm-unity. From the few studies published on the lung mycobiome, we find that there are fungi in both the healthy and diseased respiratory tract, that these fungi vary widely between individuals, and that there is a trend toward lower fungal diversity among individuals with disease. This review discusses the few studies of the lung mycobiome and details the challenges that accompany lung mycobiome studies. These challenges include sample collection and processing, sequence amplification and processing, and a history of multiple names for species. Some challenges may never be solved, but others can be solved with more data and additional studies of the lung mycobiome.

Indexed as

MicrobiotaMycobiomeFungiHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansLungfungilungmycobiomenext-generation sequencingrespiratory tract

Identifiers

PMID27687858
PMCPMC5436731

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.