Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31284329›Full record

ArticleMicrobial biotechnology2019

Protective effects of bifidobacteria against enteropathogens.

Wanping Aw, Shinji Fukuda

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Microbial biotechnology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing 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

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Therapeutic Evaluation ofNutrients · 2024
    Trial
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Ecology- and genome-based identification of theApplied and environmental microbiology · 2024
    Article
  10. The Impact of ProbioticLife (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Oral administration of live combinedFrontiers in microbiology · 2022
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Frontiers in pediatrics · 2021
    Article
  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

2 authors.

Wanping AwInstitute for Advanced Biosciences, Keio University, 246-2 Mizukami, Kakuganji, Tsuruoka, Yamagata, 997-0052, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-5075-4586
Shinji FukudaInstitute for Advanced Biosciences, Keio University, 246-2 Mizukami, Kakuganji, Tsuruoka, Yamagata, 997-0052, Japan.ORCID 0000-0001-5161-9880

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent major advances in metagenomics and metabolomics technologies have enabled us to collect more data on the gut microbiome and metabolome to evaluate its influence on host health. In this short opinion article, we have chosen to focus on summarizing the protective mechanisms of bifidobacteria, a highly regarded probiotic, and it's metabolite: acetate; against enteropathogens, specifically in the E. coli O157:H7 mice model. We advocate for using a novel approach metabologenomics, which is an integration of metagenomic and metabolomic information on a systems biology-wide approach to better understand this interplay between gut microbiome and host metabolism.

Indexed as

AntibiosisAcetatesAnimalsAnti-Bacterial AgentsBifidobacteriumDisease Models, AnimalEscherichia coli InfectionsEscherichia coli O157Gastrointestinal MicrobiomeMetabolomeMiceAcetatesAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID31284329
PMCPMC6801159

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.