Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37615721›Full record

ArticleApplied microbiology and biotechnology2023

Feasibility of using volatile urine fingerprints for the differentiation of sexually transmitted infections.

Ricardo Rubio-Sánchez, Cristina Ubeda, Rocío Ríos-Reina

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied microbiology and biotechnology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 35% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ricardo Rubio-SánchezServicio de Análisis Clínicos, Hospital Universitario Virgen de Valme, 41014, Seville, Spain.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6313-4191
Cristina UbedaDepartamento de Nutrición y Bromatología, Toxicología y Medicina Legal, Facultad de Farmacia, Universidad de Sevilla, 41012, Seville, Spain. c_ubeda@us.es.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1320-4438
Rocío Ríos-ReinaDepartamento de Nutrición y Bromatología, Toxicología y Medicina Legal, Facultad de Farmacia, Universidad de Sevilla, 41012, Seville, Spain.
Universidad de Sevilla · ESHospital Universitario de Valme · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are a public health problem worldwide, and current diagnostic methods have certain limitations. In recent years, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) have been studied as an alternative diagnostic method. Due to this, this study aimed to detect, in vaginal swabs and urine samples, VOCs emitted by highly prevalent STIs-causing bacteria (Chlamydia trachomatis, Mycoplasma genitalium, and Neisseria gonorrhoeae) to identify potential biomarkers that allow the detection of these STIs. VOCs detected in urine samples showed a better differentiation of patients with STIs due to C. trachomatis from those not infected, with 2,6-dimethyl-4-heptanone as the volatile compound most related to the presence of this bacterium. Among the VOCs most related to M. genitalium in urine, 4-methyltetradecane and 2-methylpentadecane stood out, while 3,4,4-trimethyl-2-cyclohexen-1-one was the VOC most closely related to N. gonorrhoeae infection. Moreover, C

Indexed as

Sexually Transmitted DiseasesUrineVolatile Organic CompoundsBiomarkersChlamydia trachomatisFemaleHumansMycoplasma genitaliumNeisseria gonorrhoeaeVaginaBiomarkersVolatile Organic CompoundsBacteriaSexually transmitted infectionUrineVaginal swabVOCVolatile compounds

Identifiers

PMID37615721
PMCPMC10560160
OpenAlexW4386116609

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.