ArticleRespiratory medicine case reports2017
Article in Respiratory medicine case reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Early and matureBiofilm · 2026Article
- Review
- Achromobacter xylosoxidans modulates Pseudomonas aeruginosa virulence through a complex multi-target competition.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Epidemiology, microbiology and clinical impacts of non-tuberculous mycobacteria in adult patients with cystic fibrosis.Heliyon · 2025Article
- Polymyxin Resistance and Heteroresistance Are Common in Clinical Isolates ofMicrobiology spectrum · 2023Article
- Review
- Evaluation of the Whole Proteome ofFrontiers in medicine · 2021Article
- Metabolic Modeling of Cystic Fibrosis Airway Communities Predicts Mechanisms of Pathogen Dominance.mSystemsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe clinical relevance of CASE PRESENTATION: Two siblings were positive for the F508del and Y1092X mutations, and were chronically colonized by
conclusionsBiofilm production and diminution of motility allow persistence. Only swarming motility differed between the isolates recovered from the two siblings, but this finding is not sufficient to explain the different clinical outcomes despite their similar genotypes. Modifier genes, unknown environmental factors and female gender can partially explain differences between these siblings. We were unable to correlate any microbiological findings with their clinical courses, and more translational studies are necessary to decrease the gap of knowledge between laboratory and clinical data to promote better clinical interventions.
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.