ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2019
Identification of Pathogenic Bacteria from Public Libraries via Proteomics Analysis.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Microscopic messengers: microbiota-derived bacterial extracellular vesicles in inflammatory bowel disease.Frontiers in microbiology · 2024Review
- Proteome-Based Serotyping of the Food-Borne PathogensMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Proteomics approaches: A review regarding an importance of proteome analyses in understanding the pathogens and diseases.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2022Review
- Proteomic Applications in Antimicrobial Resistance and Clinical Microbiology Studies.Infection and drug resistance · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Hazardous organisms may thrive on surfaces that are often exposed to human contact, including children's library books. In this study, swab samples were taken from 42 children's books collected from four public libraries in Texas and California. Samples were then cultivated in brain⁻heart infusion (BHI) medium and then in Luria broth (LB) medium containing either ampicillin or kanamycin. All 42 samples (100%) were positive for bacterial growth in normal BHI medium. Furthermore, 35 samples (83.3%) and 20 samples (47.6%) in total were positive in LB medium containing ampicillin or kanamycin, respectively. Bacterial populations were then identified in samples using an Orbitrap Fusion™ Tribrid ™ mass spectrometer, a state-of-the-art proteomic analysis tool. Identified bacterial species grown in ampicillin included
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.