Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32756438›Full record

ReviewViruses2020

Recent Progress in the Detection of Bacteria Using Bacteriophages: A Review.

Jan Paczesny, Łukasz Richter, Robert Hołyst

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Viruses, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Understanding phage Receptor-binding protein interaction with host surface receptor: the key for phage-Mediated detection and elimination of Pseudomonas aeruginosa.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Rapid and Specific Detection ofACS applied bio materials · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. ACS applied bio materials · 2022
    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

3 authors.

Jan PaczesnyInstitute of Physical Chemistry of the Polish Academy of Sciences, Kasprzaka 44/52, 01-224 Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-3758-3951
Łukasz RichterInstitute of Physical Chemistry of the Polish Academy of Sciences, Kasprzaka 44/52, 01-224 Warsaw, Poland.
Robert HołystInstitute of Physical Chemistry of the Polish Academy of Sciences, Kasprzaka 44/52, 01-224 Warsaw, Poland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bacteria will likely become our most significant enemies of the 21st century, as we are approaching a post-antibiotic era. Bacteriophages, viruses that infect bacteria, allow us to fight infections caused by drug-resistant bacteria and create specific, cheap, and stable sensors for bacteria detection. Here, we summarize the recent developments in the field of phage-based methods for bacteria detection. We focus on works published after mid-2017. We underline the need for further advancements, especially related to lowering the detection (below 1 CFU/mL; CFU stands for colony forming units) and shortening the time of analysis (below one hour). From the application point of view, portable, cheap, and fast devices are needed, even at the expense of sensitivity.

Indexed as

BacteriaBacterial InfectionsBacteriophagesBiosensing TechniquesColony Count, MicrobialHumansbacteria detectionbacteriophagesphage-based sensors

Identifiers

PMID32756438
PMCPMC7472331

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.