ArticleScientific reports2020
Evaluation of the upper airway microbiome and immune response with nasal epithelial lining fluid absorption and nasal washes.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploring the microbial landscape of the nasopharynx in children: a systematic review of studies using next generation sequencing.Frontiers in microbiomes · 2023Pooled it
- Impact of rapid maxillary expansion on nasal microbiota in mouth-breathing children: a prospective cohort study.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Understanding the Functional Role of the Microbiome and Metabolome in Asthma.Current allergy and asthma reports · 2023Review
- Severe COVID-19 Is Associated With an Altered Upper Respiratory Tract Microbiome.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 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
16 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Despite being commonly used to collect upper airway epithelial lining fluid, nasal washes are poorly reproducible, not suitable for serial sampling, and limited by a dilution effect. In contrast, nasal filters lack these limitations and are an attractive alternative. To examine whether nasal filters are superior to nasal washes as a sampling method for the characterization of the upper airway microbiome and immune response, we collected paired nasal filters and washes from a group of 40 healthy children and adults. To characterize the upper airway microbiome, we used 16S ribosomal RNA and shotgun metagenomic sequencing. To characterize the immune response, we measured total protein using a BCA assay and 53 immune mediators using multiplex magnetic bead-based assays. We conducted statistical analyses to compare common microbial ecology indices and immune-mediator median fluorescence intensities (MFIs) between sample types. In general, nasal filters were more likely to pass quality control in both children and adults. There were no significant differences in microbiome community richness, α-diversity, or structure between pediatric samples types; however, these were all highly dissimilar between adult sample types. In addition, there were significant differences in the abundance of amplicon sequence variants between sample types in children and adults. In adults, total proteins were significantly higher in nasal filters than nasal washes; consequently, the immune-mediator MFIs were not well detected in nasal washes. Based on better quality control sequencing metrics and higher immunoassay sensitivity, our results suggest that nasal filters are a superior sampling method to characterize the upper airway microbiome and immune response in both children and adults.
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.