Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27736307›Full record

ReviewVirulence2017

Fungi in the healthy human gastrointestinal tract.

Heather E Hallen-Adams, Mallory J Suhr

Open access · goldAbstract 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 299 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
299citing papers in PubMed
13.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

299 citing papers in PubMed, 521 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Outcomes Following Antifungal Treatment forJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

239 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Heather E Hallen-Adamsa Department of Food Science and Technology , University of Nebraska , Lincoln , NE , USA.
Mallory J Suhra Department of Food Science and Technology , University of Nebraska , Lincoln , NE , USA.
University of Nebraska–Lincoln · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many species of fungi have been detected in the healthy human gut; however, nearly half of all taxa reported have only been found in one sample or one study. Fungi capable of growing in and colonizing the gut are limited to a small number of species, mostly Candida yeasts and yeasts in the family Dipodascaceae (Galactomyces, Geotrichum, Saprochaete). Malassezia and the filamentous fungus Cladosporium are potential colonizers; more work is needed to clarify their role. Other commonly-detected fungi come from the diet or environment but either cannot or do not colonize (Penicillium and Debaryomyces species, which are common on fermented foods but cannot grow at human body temperature), while still others have dietary or environmental sources (Saccharomyces cerevisiae, a fermentation agent and sometime probiotic; Aspergillus species, ubiquitous molds) yet are likely to impact gut ecology. The gut mycobiome appears less stable than the bacterial microbiome, and is likely subject to environmental factors.

Indexed as

Gastrointestinal MicrobiomeMicrobiotaMycobiomeDietEnvironmental ExposureFungiGastrointestinal TractHumansCandidaCladosporiumdietary fungiDipodascaceaegut fungal ecologygut mycobiomegut mycobiotaMalasseziayeasts

Identifiers

PMID27736307
PMCPMC5411236
OpenAlexW2530689043

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.