ReviewMicrobiology spectrum2018
Future Technologies.
Review in Microbiology spectrum, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Microbiome analysis of environmental samples may represent the next frontier in environmental microbial forensics. Next-generation sequencing technologies significantly increased the available genetic data that could be used as evidentiary material. It is not clear, however, whether the microbiome can scale across institutions using forensic-based evidence due to the data resource requirements and the associated costs of maintaining these databases. A successful microbiome study is impacted by the quality of the information gathered and the steps in sample processing and data analysis. To ascertain the validity of methods and the results obtained, there needs to be a stringent procedure to validate the methods and ensure that the results are comparable and reproducible, not only within the laboratory but also between laboratories conducting similar research. Of primary importance for meaningful microbiome studies is an experimental design that leads to carefully executed, controlled, and reproducible studies. The microbiome literature contains a fair share of anecdotal descriptions of microbial community composition and "diagnostic" relative abundance of the taxa therein. These studies are now being supplemented by experimental designs that feature repeated measurements, error estimates, correlations of microbiota with covariates, and increasingly sophisticated statistical tests that enhance the robustness of data analysis and study conclusions. It is imperative to be careful, especially when carrying out attribution studies, to be fully aware of the possible biases included in a specific sample being analyzed.
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.