ReviewMaternal health, neonatology and perinatology2021
Methods for exploring the faecal microbiome of premature infants: a review.
Review in Maternal health, neonatology and perinatology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Gut Microbiota and Neurodevelopment in Preterm Infants: Mechanistic Insights and Prospects for Clinical Translation.Microorganisms · 2025Review
- Unveiling early-life microbial colonization profile through characterizing low-biomass maternal-infant microbiomes by 2bRAD-M.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Article
- Application of PCR-Based Techniques for the Identification of Genetic Fingerprint Diversity of Dominant Bacteria in Fecal Samples of Children with Diarrhea in Vietnam.Infectious disease reports · 2024Article
- Gut microbiota in preterm infants receiving breast milk or mixed feeding.World journal of clinical pediatrics · 2024Article
- Diversity of the Microbiota of Traditional Izmir Tulum and Izmir Brined Tulum Cheeses and Selection of Potential Probiotics.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- To Probiotic or Not to Probiotic: A Metagenomic Comparison of the Discharge Gut Microbiome of Infants Supplemented With Probiotics in NICU and Those Who Are Not.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2022Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The premature infant gut microbiome plays an important part in infant health and development, and recognition of the implications of microbial dysbiosis in premature infants has prompted significant research into these issues. The approaches to designing investigations into microbial populations are many and varied, each with its own benefits and limitations. The technique used can influence results, contributing to heterogeneity across studies. This review aimed to describe the most common techniques used in researching the preterm infant microbiome, detailing their various limitations. The objective was to provide those entering the field with a broad understanding of available methodologies, so that the likely effects of their use can be factored into literature interpretation and future study design. We found that although many techniques are used for characterising the premature infant microbiome, 16S rRNA short amplicon sequencing is the most common. 16S rRNA short amplicon sequencing has several benefits, including high accuracy, discoverability and high throughput capacity. However, this technique has limitations. Each stage of the protocol offers opportunities for the injection of bias. Bias can contribute to variability between studies using 16S rRNA high throughout sequencing. Thus, we recommend that the interpretation of previous results and future study design be given careful consideration.
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.