Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33447799›Full record

ArticleBiofilm2020

The future of biofilm research - Report on the '2019 Biofilm Bash'.

Tom Coenye, Birthe Kjellerup, Paul Stoodley, Thomas Bjarnsholt, 2019 Biofilm Bash Participants

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biofilm, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
–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

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. A laboratory perspective onFrontiers in microbiology · 2024
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Biofilm aggregates and the host airway-microbial interface.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2022
    Review
  13. Biofilm and Equine Limb Wounds.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021
    Review
  14. Comparison of TwoMicroorganisms · 2021
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Microorganisms · 2021
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Tom CoenyeLaboratory of Pharmaceutical Microbiology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Birthe KjellerupDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA.
Paul StoodleyDepartment of Microbial Infection and Immunity, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.
Thomas BjarnsholtESCMID Study Group on Biofilms, Basel, Switzerland.
2019 Biofilm Bash Participants

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In May 2019, 29 scientists with expertise in various subdisciplines of biofilm research got together in Leavenworth (WA, USA) at an event designated as the '2019 Biofilm Bash'. The goal of this informal two-day meeting was first to identify gaps in our knowledge, and then to come up with ways how the biofilm community can fill these gaps. The meeting was organized around six questions that covered the most important items brought forward by the organizers and participants. The outcome of these discussions is summarized in the present paper. We are aware that these views represent a small subset of our field, and that inevitably we will have inadvertently overlooked important developing research areas and ideas. We are nevertheless hopeful that this report will stimulate discussions and help create new ways of how we can advance our field.

Identifiers

PMID33447799
PMCPMC7798458

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.