Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27920757›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in microbiology2016

Advances and Challenges in Viability Detection of Foodborne Pathogens.

Dexin Zeng, Zi Chen, Yuan Jiang, Feng Xue, Baoguang Li

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in microbiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
14.8field-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

55 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 138 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. AI-Enabled Imaging for Pathogen Detection Under Stress Conditions: A Systematic Review.Comprehensive reviews in food science and food safety · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Prevalence and Geographical Distribution of FoodborneAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026
    Review
  5. Optimization ofJournal of environmental engineering (New York, N.Y.) · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Molecular Detection ofFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Novel TaqManFrontiers in microbiology · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Point-of-Care Diagnostic System for ViableDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Dexin ZengCollege of Veterinary Medicine, Nanjing Agricultural University Nanjing, China.
Zi ChenCollege of Veterinary Medicine, Nanjing Agricultural UniversityNanjing, China; Animal Quarantine Laboratory, Jiangsu Entry-Exit Inspection and Quarantine BureauNanjing, China.
Yuan JiangAnimal Quarantine Laboratory, Jiangsu Entry-Exit Inspection and Quarantine BureauNanjing, China; Shanghai Entry-Exit Inspection and Quarantine BureauShanghai, China.
Feng XueCollege of Veterinary Medicine, Nanjing Agricultural University Nanjing, China.
Baoguang LiDivision of Molecular Biology, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, United States Food and Drug Administration, Laurel MD, USA.
Entry Exit Inspection and Quarantine Bureau · CNNanjing Agricultural University · CNCenter for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Foodborne outbreaks are a serious public health and food safety concern worldwide. There is a great demand for rapid, sensitive, specific, and accurate methods to detect microbial pathogens in foods. Conventional methods based on cultivation of pathogens have been the gold standard protocols; however, they take up to a week to complete. Molecular assays such as polymerase chain reaction (PCR), sequencing, microarray technologies have been widely used in detection of foodborne pathogens. Among molecular assays, PCR technology [conventional and real-time PCR (qPCR)] is most commonly used in the foodborne pathogen detection because of its high sensitivity and specificity. However, a major drawback of PCR is its inability to differentiate the DNA from dead and viable cells, and this is a critical factor for the food industry, regulatory agencies and the consumer. To remedy this shortcoming, researchers have used biological dyes such as ethidium monoazide and propidium monoazide (PMA) to pretreat samples before DNA extraction to intercalate the DNA of dead cells in food samples, and then proceed with regular DNA preparation and qPCR. By combining PMA treatment with qPCR (PMA-qPCR), scientists have applied this technology to detect viable cells of various bacterial pathogens in foods. The incorporation of PMA into PCR-based assays for viability detection of pathogens in foods has increased significantly in the last decade. On the other hand, some downsides with this approach have been noted, particularly to achieve complete suppression of signal of DNA from the dead cells present in some particular food matrix. Nowadays, there is a tendency of more and more researchers adapting this approach for viability detection; and a few commercial kits based on PMA are available in the market. As time goes on, more scientists apply this approach to a broader range of pathogen detections, this viability approach (PMA or other chemicals such as platinum compound) may eventually become a common methodology for the rapid, sensitive, and accurate detection of foodborne pathogens. In this review, we summarize the development in the field including progress and challenges and give our perspective in this area.

Indexed as

ethidium monoazidefalse positive detectionfoodborne pathogensoutbreaksPMA-qPCRpropidium monoazideviability detection

Identifiers

PMID27920757
PMCPMC5118415
OpenAlexW2552517587

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.