Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30065718›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2018

Microbial Similarity and Preference for Specific Sites in Healthy Oral Cavity and Esophagus.

Li Dong, Jian Yin, Jing Zhao, Shan-Rui Ma, Hai-Rui Wang, Meng Wang, Wen Chen, Wen-Qiang Wei

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

49 citing papers in PubMed, 72 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Isolation ofJournal of oral microbiology · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. IsWorld journal of gastroenterology · 2024
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Effect ofFrontiers in oncology · 2024
    Review
  20. Review
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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Li DongDepartment of Epidemiology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Jian YinDepartment of Epidemiology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Jing ZhaoDepartment of Epidemiology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Shan-Rui MaDepartment of Epidemiology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Hai-Rui WangDepartment of Epidemiology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Meng WangDepartment of Epidemiology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Wen ChenDepartment of Epidemiology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Wen-Qiang WeiDepartment of Epidemiology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College · CNShanxi University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Human microbial communities are highly complex ecosystems, but it remains unclear if microbial compositions have any similarity in distinct sites of the oral cavity and esophagus in particular. Clinical samples were collected from three niches (saliva, tongue dorsum and supragingival plaque) of the oral cavity and three segments (upper, middle, and lower) of the esophagus in 27 healthy individuals. Bacterial V3-V4 region of 16S rRNA gene in these samples was amplified and sequenced on Illumina sequencing platform, followed by data analysis using QIIME and LEfSe softwares. Highly diverse bacterial flora with 365 genera belonging to 29 phyla resided in the oral cavity and 594 genera belonging to 29 phyla in the esophagus. The phyla Proteobacteria, Firmicutes, Bacteroidetes, Actinobacteria, Fusobacteria, and TM7 were most abundant in both the oral cavity and the esophagus, but the phyla Actinobacteria and Bacteroidetes were preferable in the oral cavity and Firmicutes in the esophagus. The genera

Indexed as

16S rRNA gene sequencingesophagusmicrobial preferencemicrobial similarityoral cavity

Identifiers

PMID30065718
PMCPMC6056649
OpenAlexW2811367710

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.