ArticleMethods and protocols2020
Comparison of DNA Extracted from Pediatric Saliva, Gingival Crevicular Fluid and Site-Specific Biofilm Samples.
Article in Methods and protocols, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Investigation of antibiotic resistance, virulence genes, and biofilm formation ofIranian journal of veterinary research · 2024Article
- Administration of Clinical COVID-19 Mouthwashing Protocol and Potential Modulation of Pediatric Oral Bacterial Prevalence ofPediatric reports · 2023Article
- Assessment of SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) Clinical Mouthwash Protocol and Prevalence of the Oral PathogenMethods and protocols · 2023Article
- Oral Prevalence ofMicroorganisms · 2023Article
- Molecular Screening and Analysis Reveal Novel Oral Site-Specific Locations for the Cariogenic PathogenDentistry journal · 2021Article
- Microbial Screening Reveals Oral Site-Specific Locations of the Periodontal PathogenCurrent issues in molecular biology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
(1) Introduction: Due to the non-invasive nature of saliva, many methods have been used to isolate and collect DNA from saliva samples for microbial screening. Many oral microbes also inhabit the oral biofilm, which may represent significantly different microbial constituents that may contribute to oral health and disease, including caries and periodontal disorders. Moreover, the biofilm may vary within the same patient at different sites. Few studies have evaluated the comparison between DNA isolated from saliva and DNA from site-specific biofilm, with virtually no studies addressing this analysis among pediatric patients. (2) Methods: An existing repository of paper point derived biofilm, gingival crevicular fluid (GCF), and unstimulated saliva samples previously collected from pediatric patients (
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.