ArticleScientific reports2019
Towards a rational design of faecal transplant analogues.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- A Review of Clinical Trials Involving Genetically Modified Bacteria, Bacteriophages and Their Associated Risk Assessments.Applied biosafety : journal of the American Biological Safety Association · 2024Review
- Perspective: on the future of fecal microbiota transplantation.Frontiers in microbiology · 2024Article
- Nurturing by nutrition: On the future of gut microbiota management strategies for autoimmune disease.Frontiers in nutrition · 2022Article
- Regulation, risk and safety of Faecal Microbiota Transplant.Infection prevention in practice · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Faecal transplants (microbiota transfer) have shown to be promising therapies having a wide range of therapeutic applications. However, current safety considerations hamper further valorisation. As such, well designed faecal transplant analogues provide an interesting alternative to minimize possible safety aspects. However, to date little knowledge on how to rationally design such analogues exists. Here, we show by applying first order basic graph theory that such analogues dedicated to restoring a specific physiological functionality (a microbial guild) should consist of 5-6 species to maximize stability, efficiency, and minimize safety issues and production costs.
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.