ReviewFrontiers in dentistry2022
Review in Frontiers in dentistry, 2022. 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, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Antimicrobial Peptides Against Antimicrobial-Resistant Bacteria: Focus on Machine Learning.Infection and drug resistance · 2026Review
- Matrix Metalloproteinase Inhibitors and Their Potential Clinical Application in Periodontitis.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Boosting AMPs' Power: From Structural Engineering to Nanotechnology-Based Delivery.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Antimicrobial peptide biological activity, delivery systems and clinical translation status and challenges.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Review
- Targeted antimicrobial self-assembly peptide hydrogel with in situ bio-mimic remineralization for caries management.Bioactive materials · 2025Article
- Antimicrobial Peptides towards Clinical Application-A Long History to Be Concluded.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- The Anti-Caries Effects of a Novel Peptide on Dentine Caries: An In Vitro Study.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
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 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Oral biofilms are a group of healthy synergistic organisms, that on interplay with the immune system undergo transition and colonize the pathogenic bacteria, leading to various diseases like dental caries, gingivitis, periodontitis and a few systemic conditions. Dental caries being the most common disease of the oral cavity, comprise a heterogeneous group of bacteria that can cause imbalance in the biofilm. Caries prevention has been in research for decades, where antibiotics, chemical biocides and fluoride-antimicrobial approaches have not been adequate for this multifactorial disease. In recent years, the major focus of caries prevention has been shifted to plaque-biofilm modification as an ecological approach that would prevent bacterial colonization. Saliva produces various natural antimicrobial peptides that can regulate biofilm modification. Synthetic production of antimicrobial peptides concentrates on selective elimination and a targeted approach towards cariogenic pathogens, precisely Streptococcus mutans (S. mutans). A search in Medline/PubMed, EBSCO and ScienceDirect databases on C16G2, antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) and S. mutans, using MeSH (Medical Subject Heading) terms was performed and papers published until 2020 were included for further evaluation. A total of eight articles written in English with available full texts were selected based on the search strategy. They included four publications on AMPs against S. mutans and another four articles on AMPs in caries prevention. This review focuses on C16G2 antimicrobial peptide and its potential to modify biofilm and inhibit the targeted bacteria causing dental caries.
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.