Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34795298›Full record

ArticleNPJ biofilms and microbiomes2021

Assessing saliva microbiome collection and processing methods.

Abigail J S Armstrong, Veenat Parmar, Martin J Blaser

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NPJ biofilms and microbiomes, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Evaluation of Salivary Biomarkers of Periodontal Disease Based on Smoking Status: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Examining the healthy human microbiome concept.Nature reviews. Microbiology · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Abigail J S ArmstrongCenter for Advanced Biotechnology and Medicine, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ, 08854, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7677-8092
Veenat ParmarCenter for Advanced Biotechnology and Medicine, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ, 08854, USA.
Martin J BlaserCenter for Advanced Biotechnology and Medicine, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ, 08854, USA. martin.blaser@cabm.rutgers.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-2447-2443
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey · US

Funding

Cohort and biomarkers for COVID-19 severity, natural history, and reinfectionR01AI158911 · NIAID · RUTGERS BIOMEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCES · PI BARRETT, EMILY S, BLASER, MARTIN J · 2021 to 2023
$2.6M
NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI158911
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The oral microbiome has been connected with lung health and may be of significance in the progression of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Saliva-based SARS-CoV-2 tests provide the opportunity to leverage stored samples for assessing the oral microbiome. However, these collection kits have not been tested for their accuracy in measuring the oral microbiome. Saliva is highly enriched with human DNA and reducing it prior to shotgun sequencing may increase the depth of bacterial reads. We examined both the effect of saliva collection method and sequence processing on measurement of microbiome depth and diversity by 16S rRNA gene amplicon and shotgun metagenomics. We collected 56 samples from 22 subjects. Each subject provided saliva samples with and without preservative, and a subset provided a second set of samples the following day. 16S rRNA gene (V4) sequencing was performed on all samples, and shotgun metagenomics was performed on a subset of samples collected with preservative with and without human DNA depletion before sequencing. We observed that the beta diversity distances within subjects over time was smaller than between unrelated subjects, and distances within subjects were smaller in samples collected with preservative. Samples collected with preservative had higher alpha diversity measuring both richness and evenness. Human DNA depletion before extraction and shotgun sequencing yielded higher total and relative reads mapping to bacterial sequences. We conclude that collecting saliva with preservative may provide more consistent measures of the oral microbiome and depleting human DNA increases yield of bacterial sequences.

Indexed as

AdultBacteriaCOVID-19DNADNA, BacterialFemaleHumansMaleMetagenomeMetagenomicsMicrobiotaMiddle AgedRNA, Ribosomal, 16SSalivaSARS-CoV-2Sequence Analysis, DNADNADNA, BacterialRNA, Ribosomal, 16S

Identifiers

PMID34795298
PMCPMC8602330
OpenAlexW3213177417

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.