Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32169075›Full record

ArticleAnnals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials2020

A rapid and simple method for routine determination of antibiotic sensitivity to biofilm populations of Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

Dhammika Leshan Wannigama, Cameron Hurst, Parichart Hongsing, Lachlan Pearson, Thammakorn Saethang, Naphat Chantaravisoot, Uthaibhorn Singkham-In, Sirirat Luk-In, Robin James Storer, Tanittha Chatsuwan

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Bacterial persisters: molecular mechanisms and therapeutic development.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2024
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

10 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Dhammika Leshan WannigamaDepartment of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Cameron HurstDepartment of Statistics, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Parichart HongsingSchool of Integrative Medicine, Mae Fah Luang University, Chiang Rai, Thailand.
Lachlan PearsonCenter of Excellence in Systems Biology, Research Affairs, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Thammakorn SaethangCenter of Excellence in Systems Biology, Research Affairs, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Naphat ChantaravisootCenter of Excellence in Systems Biology, Research Affairs, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Uthaibhorn Singkham-InDepartment of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Sirirat Luk-InDepartment of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Robin James StorerOffice of Research Affairs, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Tanittha ChatsuwanDepartment of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand. Tanittha.c@chula.ac.th.
Chulalongkorn University · THKing Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital · THMae Fah Luang University · THQIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute · AUUniversity of Western Australia · AU

Funding

Chulalongkorn University No. 39 (2/61)Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University No. 39 (2/61)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Treatment of infections by Pseudomonas aeruginosa forming biofilms after antimicrobial testing on planktonic bacteria can result in substantial failure. Therefore, we offer a robust and simple experimental platform to test the impact of antimicrobials on biofilms. Antibiotic response patterns varied uniquely within biofilm formation capacity and minimal biofilm eradication concentrations (MBECs) has a significantly better discriminatory power than minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) to differentiate the overall efficiency of antibiotics to eradicate biofilm. Our resazurin-based 96-well-plate platform is able to emulate bacterial responses to antibiotics under biofilm conditions in a fast, simple, and cost-effective screening method adaptable to automation, and warrants trials in the clinic.

Indexed as

Pseudomonas InfectionsAnti-Bacterial AgentsBiofilmsHumansMicrobial Sensitivity TestsPseudomonas aeruginosaAnti-Bacterial AgentsAntibiofilmAntimicrobial susceptibilityBiofilm infectionsBiofilmsChronic bacterial infectionsPseudomonas aeruginosa

Identifiers

PMID32169075
PMCPMC7071750
OpenAlexW3010885401

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.