ReviewCurrent microbiology2023
A Review on Microbial Species for Forensic Body Fluid Identification in Healthy and Diseased Humans.
Review in Current microbiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Research advances in the role of circulating microorganisms in gastrointestinal tumors (Review).Molecular and clinical oncology · 2026Review
- Understanding the bacteriome, phageome and phage-associated bacteriome in healthy Vietnamese children under two years of age.Archives of microbiology · 2026Article
- The Mystery of the Hidden Trace: Emerging Genetic Approaches to Improve Body Fluid Identification.Genes · 2026Review
- An Overview of How HNCs Radiotherapy Affects Oral Microbiota: Shifts, Complications, and Management Strategies.Journal of lasers in medical sciences · 2026Review
- Evaluation of the Microbiome Identification of Forensically Relevant Biological Fluids: A Pilot Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Microbial communities present in body fluids can assist in distinguishing between types of body fluids. Metagenomic studies have reported bacterial genera which are core to specific body fluids and are greatly influenced by geographical location and ethnicity. Bacteria in body fluids could also be due to bacterial infection; hence, it would be worthwhile taking into consideration bacterial species associated with diseases. The present review reports bacterial species characteristic of diseased and healthy body fluids across geographical locations, and bacteria described in forensic studies, with the aim of collating a set of bacteria to serve as the core species-specific markers for forensic body fluid identification. The most widely reported saliva-specific bacterial species are Streptococcus salivarius, Prevotella melaninogenica, Neisseria flavescens, with Fusobacterium nucleatum associated with increased diseased state. Lactobacillus crispatus and Lactobacillus iners are frequently dominant in the vaginal microbiome of healthy women. Atopobium vaginae, Prevotella bivia, and Gardnerella vaginalis are more prevalent in women with bacterial vaginosis. Semen and urine-specific bacteria at species level have not been reported, and menstrual blood bacteria are indistinguishable from vaginal fluid. Targeting more than one bacterial species is recommended for accurate body fluid identification. Although metagenomic sequencing provides information of a broad microbial profile, the specific bacterial species could be used to design biosensors for rapid body fluid identification. Validation of microbial typing methods and its application in identifying body fluids in a mixed sample would allow regular use of microbial profiling in a forensic workflow.
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.