Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36945040›Full record

ArticleMicrobiome2023

Realising respiratory microbiomic meta-analyses: time for a standardised framework.

David Broderick, Robyn Marsh, David Waite, Naveen Pillarisetti, Anne B Chang, Michael W Taylor

Full text readLetterVideo-Audio Media
In one paragraph

Article in Microbiome, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

6 authors.

David BroderickSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Robyn MarshChild Health Division, Menzies School of Health Research, Charles Darwin University, Darwin, NT, Australia.
David WaiteSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Naveen PillarisettiStarship Children's Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand.
Anne B ChangChild Health Division, Menzies School of Health Research, Charles Darwin University, Darwin, NT, Australia.
Michael W TaylorSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand. mw.taylor@auckland.ac.nz.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In microbiome fields of study, meta-analyses have proven to be a valuable tool for identifying the technical drivers of variation among studies and results of investigations in several diseases, such as those of the gut and sinuses. Meta-analyses also represent a powerful and efficient approach to leverage existing scientific data to both reaffirm existing findings and generate new hypotheses within the field. However, there are currently limited data in other fields, such as the paediatric respiratory tract, where extension of original data becomes even more critical due to samples often being difficult to obtain and process for a range of both technical and ethical reasons. Performing such analyses in an evolving field comes with challenges related to data accessibility and heterogeneity. This is particularly the case in paediatric respiratory microbiomics - a field in which best microbiome-related practices are not yet firmly established, clinical heterogeneity abounds and ethical challenges can complicate sharing of patient data. Having recently conducted a large-scale, individual participant data meta-analysis of the paediatric respiratory microbiota (n = 2624 children from 20 studies), we discuss here some of the unique barriers facing these studies and open and invite a dialogue towards future opportunities. Video Abstract.

Indexed as

MicrobiotaChildHumansMeta-Analysis as TopicRespiratory System

Identifiers

PMID36945040
PMCPMC10031919

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
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.