Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35097108›Full record

ArticleBioMed research international2022

Mahasin Ahmed Wadi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BioMed research international, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

1 author.

Mahasin Ahmed WadiMedical Microbiology, Department of Medical Surgical College of Nursing, Princess Nourah Bint Abdulrahman University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3978-0863

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe emergence of multi-drug-resistant organisms has created a lot of clinical problems. Hence, there is a need to find natural alternative treatment to counter the multi-drug-resistant organisms. Honey has a well-established usage as wound dressing in ancient and traditional medicine.

objectiveThe objective of this study is to establish a baseline for the antibacterial activity of 32 global raw natural and commercial various honey samples against 8 clinical isolates.

methodsThirty-two honey samples (raw and commercial honey) collected from different global countries with different floral origins were tested

resultsThe following 8 clinical isolates were identified by conventional bacteriological methods:

conclusionAll of the bacterial species studied were uniformly receptive to all raw and commercial tested honey samples; in contrast, the tested organisms showed low sensitivity to antibiotics. Commercial honey has the same antibacterial activity as the raw natural unprocessed honey against tested clinical isolates. Thus, honey is a successful alternative to conventional antibiotics as has been proved against clinical isolates.

Indexed as

HoneyMethicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureusAnti-Bacterial AgentsEscherichia coliGram-Negative BacteriaGram-Positive BacteriaHumansKlebsiella pneumoniaeMicrobial Sensitivity TestsPseudomonas aeruginosaSalmonella typhiStaphylococcus aureusAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID35097108
PMCPMC8799333

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.