Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31844638›Full record

ArticleOpen forum infectious diseases2019

In Vitro Activity of Essential Oils Against Gram-Positive and Gram-Negative Clinical Isolates, Including Carbapenem-Resistant

Jan E Patterson, Leticia McElmeel, Nathan P Wiederhold

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Open forum infectious diseases, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Effect ofFood science & nutrition · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Essential Oil ofPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

3 authors.

Jan E PattersonDepartments of Medicine/Infectious Diseases and Pathology, Department of Pathology, University of Texas Health San Antonio, Long School of Medicine, San Antonio, Texas, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6459-9783
Leticia McElmeelDepartments of Medicine/Infectious Diseases and Pathology, Department of Pathology, University of Texas Health San Antonio, Long School of Medicine, San Antonio, Texas, USA.
Nathan P WiederholdDepartments of Medicine/Infectious Diseases and Pathology, Department of Pathology, University of Texas Health San Antonio, Long School of Medicine, San Antonio, Texas, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2225-5122

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is increasing demand for compounds to treat antimicrobial-resistant pathogens, and essential oils have gained interest. Moreover, previous studies have demonstrated antimicrobial activity of these nonpharmaceutical products. We investigated the activity of essential oils against multiresistant bacteria and other clinical isolates to evaluate the potential of their use topically and/or internally for treatment of bacterial infections.

methodsWe studied the in vitro activity of 10 essential oils and 1 essential oil blend against clinical isolates including extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing

resultsEssential oils of oregano, thyme, cinnamon bark, and lemongrass had the largest zones of inhibition against Gram-positive organisms, whereas cinnamon bark had the largest zone of inhibition against

conclusionsEssential oils have promising in vitro activity that warrants further study of their activity and use in the clinical setting.

Indexed as

carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceaeessential oilsin vitro susceptibility

Identifiers

PMID31844638
PMCPMC6902000

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.