Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38355866›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Standardization of the protocol for oral cavity examination and collecting of the biological samples for microbiome research using the next-generation sequencing (NGS): own experience with the COVID-19 patients.

Barbara Brzychczy-Sroka, Katarzyna Talaga-Ćwiertnia, Agnieszka Sroka-Oleksiak, Artur Gurgul, Elżbieta Zarzecka-Francica, Wojciech Ostrowski, Janusz Kąkol, Kamil Drożdż, Monika Brzychczy-Włoch, Joanna Zarzecka

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
6.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. From gut to mouth: salivary signatures of carcinogenic microbiota.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Engineered Tissue Models to Decode Host-Microbiota Interactions.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. 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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Barbara Brzychczy-SrokaDepartment of Conservative Dentistry with Endodontics, Institute of Dentistry, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Kraków, Poland.
Katarzyna Talaga-ĆwiertniaChair of Microbiology, Department of Molecular Medical Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Czysta 18, 31-121, Kraków, Poland. katarzyna.talaga@uj.edu.pl.
Agnieszka Sroka-OleksiakChair of Microbiology, Department of Molecular Medical Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Czysta 18, 31-121, Kraków, Poland.
Artur GurgulCenter for Experimental and Innovative Medicine, The University of Agriculture in Kraków, Kraków, Poland.
Elżbieta Zarzecka-FrancicaDepartment of Prosthodontics and Orthodontics, Institute of Dentistry, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Kraków, Poland.
Wojciech OstrowskiDepartment of Conservative Dentistry with Endodontics, Institute of Dentistry, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Kraków, Poland.
Janusz KąkolUniversity Hospital in Cracow, Temporary COVID Ward No. 1, Kraków, Poland.
Kamil DrożdżChair of Microbiology, Department of Molecular Medical Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Czysta 18, 31-121, Kraków, Poland.
Monika Brzychczy-WłochChair of Microbiology, Department of Molecular Medical Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Czysta 18, 31-121, Kraków, Poland.
Joanna ZarzeckaDepartment of Conservative Dentistry with Endodontics, Institute of Dentistry, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Kraków, Poland.
Jagiellonian University · PLCracow University of Technology · PLUniversity of Agriculture in Krakow · PL

Funding

Narodowe Centrum Badań i Rozwoju CRACoV-HHS project (Model of multi-specialist hospital and non-hospital care for patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection) through the initiative "Support for specialist hospitals in fighting the spread of SARS-CoV-2 infection and in treating COVID-19" (contract number - SZPITALE-JEDNOIMIENNE/18/2020)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To date, publications have shown that compositions of oral microbiota differ depending on their habitats (e.g. tongue, tonsils, pharynx). The absence of set standards for the choice of the areas and conditions of material collection makes the oral microbiome one of the most difficult environments for a comparative analysis with other researchers, which is a meaningful limitation during an assessment of the potential effects of microorganisms as biomarkers in the courses of various human diseases. Therefore, standardisation of basic conditions of a dental examination and collection of material for the next generation sequencing (NGS) is worth attempting. The standardisation of the dental exam and collection of the clinical materials: saliva, swab from the tongue ridge, hard palate, palatine tonsils and oropharynx, supragingival plaque and subgingival plaque. Protocol involved the patients (n = 60), assigned to 3 groups: I-COVID-19 convalescents who received antibiotics, n = 17, II-COVID-19 convalescents, n = 23 and III-healthy individuals, n = 20. The collected biological samples were used to conduct NGS (16S rRNA). The conditions of patient preparation for collecting biological materials as well as the schedule of dental examination, were proposed. Based on the research conducted, we have indicated the dental indicators that best differentiate the group of COVID-19 patients (groups I and II) from healthy people (group III). These include the DMFT, D and BOP indices. The use of alpha and beta diversity analysis provided an overall insight into the diversity of microbial communities between specific niches and patient groups. The most different diversity between the studied group of patients (group II) and healthy people (group III) was noted in relation to the supragingival plaque. The order of activities during the dental exam as well as while collecting and securing clinical materials is particularly important to avoid technical errors and material contamination which may result in erroneous conclusions from the analyses of the results of sensitive tests such as the NGS. It has been shown that the dental indices: DMFT, D number, PI and BOP are the best prognostic parameters to assess the oral health. Based on beta diversity the most sensitive niche and susceptible to changes in the composition of the microbiota is the supragingival plaque. The procedures developed by our team can be applied as ready-to-use forms in studies conducted by other researchers.

Indexed as

COVID-19MicrobiotaHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansMouthReference StandardsRNA, Ribosomal, 16SRNA, Ribosomal, 16SCalibrationDentistryMicrobiotaNext generation sequencingOral healthOral hygieneStandardization

Identifiers

PMID38355866
PMCPMC10867075
OpenAlexW4391813445

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.