Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35520790›Full record

ReviewRSC advances2019

A review on the biosynthesis of metal and metal salt nanoparticles by microbes.

Geeta Gahlawat, Anirban Roy Choudhury

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in RSC advances, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 137 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
137citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

137 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Biogenesis ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

77 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Geeta GahlawatCSIR - Institute of Microbial Technology Sector 39A Chandigarh India anirban@imtech.res.in +91 172 2695215 +91 172 6665312.
Anirban Roy ChoudhuryCSIR - Institute of Microbial Technology Sector 39A Chandigarh India anirban@imtech.res.in +91 172 2695215 +91 172 6665312.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8119-828X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Metal nanoparticles have received great attention from researchers across the world because of a plethora of applications in agriculture and the biomedical field as antioxidants and antimicrobial compounds. Over the past few years, green nanotechnology has emerged as a significant approach for the synthesis and fabrication of metal nanoparticles. This green route employs various reducing and stabilizing agents from biological resources for the synthesis of nanoparticles. The present article aims to review the progress made in recent years on nanoparticle biosynthesis by microbes. These microbial resources include bacteria, fungi, yeast, algae and viruses. This review mainly focuses on the biosynthesis of the most commonly studied metal and metal salt nanoparticles such as silver, gold, platinum, palladium, copper, cadmium, titanium oxide, zinc oxide and cadmium sulphide. These nanoparticles can be used in pharmaceutical products as antimicrobial and anti-biofilm agents, targeted delivery of anticancer drugs, water electrolysis, waste water treatment, biosensors, biocatalysis, crop protection against pathogens, degradation of dyes

Identifiers

PMID35520790
PMCPMC9064032

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.