Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35435702›Full record

ReviewmBio2022

Elucidating the Mechanisms of Action of Antimicrobial Agents.

M Ashley Hudson, Steve W Lockless

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in mBio, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Sensing of Antibiotic-Bacteria Interactions.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  14. Modern Trends in Natural Antibiotic Discovery.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Overview on Strategies and Assays for Antibiotic Discovery.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
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

2 authors.

M Ashley HudsonDepartment of Biology, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA.
Steve W LocklessDepartment of Biology, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7683-6339

Funding

Physiological Role for Cation Channels in BacteriaR01GM132436 · NIGMS · TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY · PI SIEGELE, DEBORAH A. · 2019 to 2022
$1.6M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM132436
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite the ever-growing antibiotic resistance crisis, the rate at which new antimicrobials are being discovered and approved for human use has rapidly declined over the past 75 years. A barrier for advancing newly identified antibiotics beyond discovery is elucidating their mechanism(s) of action. Traditional approaches, such as affinity purification and isolation of resistant mutants, have proven effective but are not always viable options for identifying targets. There has been a recent explosion in research that relies on profiling methods, such as thermal proteome profiling in bacteria, for better understanding the mechanisms of discovered antimicrobials. Here, we provide an overview of the importance of target deconvolution in antimicrobial discovery, detailing traditional approaches, as well as the most recent advances in methodologies for identifying antimicrobial targets.

Indexed as

Anti-Infective AgentsAnti-Bacterial AgentsBacteriaHumansAnti-Bacterial AgentsAnti-Infective Agentsantimicrobial agentsmechanisms of resistancetarget deconvolution

Identifiers

PMID35435702
PMCPMC9239108

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.