Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30909614›Full record

ReviewMicroorganisms2019

The Significance of Mesophilic

Sunniva Hoel, Olav Vadstein, Anita N Jakobsen

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Microorganisms, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 84 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Phylogenomics of novel clones ofMicrobiology spectrum · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. EmergingFrontiers in microbiology · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Cytotoxicity and Antimicrobial Resistance ofAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Whole genome sequence analysis ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2023
    Article
  20. Article
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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sunniva HoelDepartment of Biotechnology and Food Science, NTNU⁻Norwegian University of Science and Technology, N-7491 Trondheim, Norway. sunniva.hoel@ntnu.no.
Olav VadsteinDepartment of Biotechnology and Food Science, NTNU⁻Norwegian University of Science and Technology, N-7491 Trondheim, Norway. olav.vadstein@ntnu.no.
Anita N JakobsenDepartment of Biotechnology and Food Science, NTNU⁻Norwegian University of Science and Technology, N-7491 Trondheim, Norway. anita.n.jakobsen@ntnu.no.
Norwegian University of Science and Technology · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Minimally processed and ready-to-eat (RTE) seafood products are gaining popularity because of their availability in retail stores and the consumers' perception of convenience. Products that are subjected to mild processing and products that do not require additional heating prior to consumption are eaten by an increasing proportion of the population, including people that are more susceptible to foodborne disease. Worldwide, seafood is an important source of foodborne outbreaks, but the exact burden is not known. The increased interest in seafood products for raw consumption introduces new food safety issues that must be addressed by all actors in the food chain. Bacteria belonging to genus

Indexed as

Aeromonasfood safetyfood spoilageready-to-eatsashimiseafoodsushivirulence

Identifiers

PMID30909614
PMCPMC6463141
OpenAlexW2922632220

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.