Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29707229›Full record

ReviewNPJ biofilms and microbiomes2018

Fighting biofilms with lantibiotics and other groups of bacteriocins.

Harsh Mathur, Des Field, Mary C Rea, Paul D Cotter, Colin Hill, R Paul Ross

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in NPJ biofilms and microbiomes, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 92 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
92citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

92 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. From predicted bacteriocins to ecological function.Current research in microbial sciences · 2026
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

32 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors.

Harsh Mathur1Teagasc Food Research Centre, Moorepark, Fermoy, County Cork Ireland.
Des Field2APC Microbiome Ireland, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0003-4425-5817
Mary C Rea1Teagasc Food Research Centre, Moorepark, Fermoy, County Cork Ireland.
Paul D Cotter1Teagasc Food Research Centre, Moorepark, Fermoy, County Cork Ireland.
Colin Hill2APC Microbiome Ireland, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
R Paul Ross2APC Microbiome Ireland, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Biofilms are sessile communities of bacteria typically embedded in an extracellular polymeric matrix. Bacterial cells embedded in biofilms are inherently recalcitrant to antimicrobials, compared to cells existing in a planktonic state, and are notoriously difficult to eradicate once formed. Avenues to tackle biofilms thus far have largely focussed on attempting to disrupt the initial stages of biofilm formation, including adhesion and maturation of the biofilm. Such an approach is advantageous as the concentrations required to inhibit formation of biofilms are generally much lower than removing a fully established biofilm. The crisis of antibiotic resistance in clinical settings worldwide has been further exacerbated by the ability of certain pathogenic bacteria to form biofilms. Perhaps the most notorious biofilm formers described from a clinical viewpoint have been methicillin-resistant

Identifiers

PMID29707229
PMCPMC5908865

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.