ArticleFEMS microbiology letters2016
Personal microbiomes and next-generation sequencing for laboratory-based education.
Article in FEMS microbiology letters, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Teaching next-generation sequencing to medical students with a portable sequencing device.Perspectives on medical education · 2021Article
- Inquiry-Driven Bioinformatics Laboratory Research Module: Metagenomic Study of Student Oral Microbes.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2021Article
- Microbiomes for All.Frontiers in microbiology · 2020Review
- The Bean Beetle Microbiome Project: A Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experience in Microbiology.Frontiers in microbiology · 2020Article
- Fiber Force: A Fiber Diet Intervention in an Advanced Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experience (CURE) Course.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2020Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Sequencing and bioinformatics technologies have advanced rapidly in recent years, driven largely by developments in next-generation sequencing (NGS) technology. Given the increasing importance of these advances, there is a growing need to incorporate concepts and practices relating to NGS into undergraduate and high school science curricula. We believe that direct access to sequencing and bioinformatics will improve the ability of students to understand the information obtained through these increasingly ubiquitous research tools. In this commentary, we discuss approaches and challenges for bringing NGS into the classroom based on our experiences in developing and running a microbiome project in high school and undergraduate courses. We describe strategies for maximizing student engagement through establishing personal relevance and utilizing an inquiry-based structure. Additionally, we address the practical issues of incorporating cutting edge technologies into an established curriculum. Looking forward, we anticipate that NGS educational experiments will become more commonplace as sequencing costs continue to decrease and the workflow becomes more user friendly.
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.