Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32742723›Full record

ArticleActa naturae

Fecal Metabolites As Non-Invasive Biomarkers of Gut Diseases.

E S Zhgun, E N Ilina

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Acta naturae. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Evaluation of solutions for stabilizing feces in metabolomics studies using GC × GC-TOFMS.Metabolomics : Official journal of the Metabolomic Society · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

E S ZhgunFederal Research and Clinical Center of Physical-chemical Medicine of Federal Medical Biological Agency, Moscow, 119435 Russia.
E N IlinaFederal Research and Clinical Center of Physical-chemical Medicine of Federal Medical Biological Agency, Moscow, 119435 Russia.
Federal Medical-Biological Agency · RU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent studies have shown the importance of the human intestinal microbiome in maintaining a healthy gastrointestinal tract, as well as in the development of pathological processes. The intestinal microbiome manifests itself primarily as fecal metabolites. In the past decade, there has been growing interest in studying its composition, which for the most part had to do with the possibility of using the metabolomic analysis in clinical diagnosis. In contrast to the comprehensive description of blood serum, urine, saliva, and cerebrospinal fluid metabolites, data on fecal metabolites is sparse. Despite the instrumental and methodological achievements in the metabolomic analysis in general, the analysis of fecal metabolome remains less well developed, mainly because of the inhomogeneity of its composition and the lack of standardized methods for collecting, processing, and analyzing fecal samples. This review summarizes data on methods for studying and describing various groups of fecal metabolites. It also assesses their potential as tools in the diagnosis of gastrointestinal diseases.

Indexed as

fecal metabolitesinflammatory bowel diseasesmetabolomic analysisnon-invasive biomarkers

Identifiers

PMID32742723
PMCPMC7385093
OpenAlexW3048016770

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.