ArticleThe Laryngoscope2018
Oral sampling methods are associated with differences in immune marker concentrations.
Article in The Laryngoscope, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Extensive comparison of salivary collection, transportation, preparation, and storage methods: a systematic review.BMC oral health · 2024Pooled it
- Mouthwash-Based Highly Sensitive Pyro-Genotyping for Nine Sexually Transmitted Human Papilloma Virus Genotypes.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Article
- The MK2 pathway is linked to G-CSF, cytokine production and metastasis in gastric cancer: a novel intercorrelation analysis approach.Journal of translational medicine · 2020Article
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
Abstract
objectiveTo determine whether the concentration and distribution of immune markers in paired oral samples were similar. STUDY TYPE: Clinical research. STUDY
designCross-sectional study.
methodsPaired saliva and oral secretions (OS) samples were collected. The concentration of immune markers was estimated using Luminex multiplex assay (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA). For each sample, the concentration of respective immune markers was normalized to total protein present and log-transformed. Median concentrations of immune markers were compared between both types of samples. Intermarker correlation in each sampling method and across sampling methods was evaluated.
resultsThere were 90 study participants. Concentrations of immune markers in saliva samples were significantly different from concentrations in OS samples. Oral secretions samples showed higher concentrations of immunoregulatory markers, whereas the saliva samples contained proinflammatory markers in higher concentration.
conclusionThe immune marker profile in saliva samples is distinct from the immune marker profile in paired OS samples. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2b. Laryngoscope, 128:E214-E221, 2018.
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.