Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39420944›Full record

ReviewJournal of oral microbiology2024

Findings and methodologies in oral phageome research: a systematic review.

Xin Chen, Ting Zou, Guicong Ding, Shan Jiang

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of oral microbiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  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

4 authors.

Xin ChenShenzhen Children's Hospital, China Medical University (CMU), Shenzhen, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-9040-7024
Ting ZouShenzhen Clinical College of Stomatology, School of Stomatology, Southern Medical University, Shenzhen, Guangdong, China.
Guicong DingShenzhen Children's Hospital, China Medical University (CMU), Shenzhen, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0918-8620
Shan JiangShenzhen Clinical College of Stomatology, School of Stomatology, Southern Medical University, Shenzhen, Guangdong, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The oral microbiome serves as both an indicator and a mediator of oral health. Evidence indicates that bacteriophages (phages) are widely present in the oral microbiome and exhibit diverse classifications and interactions with human cells and other microbes. These phages constitute the oral phageome, which potentially exerts significant yet unexplored effects on the interplay between oral and general health. Methods: Three databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase and Scopus) were searched for metagenomic analyses that investigated the oral phageome. Eligible studies were synthesized based on their methodological approaches and findings. Results: A total of 14 articles were included in this systematic review. Among the 14 articles included, there were six studies that discussed disease-related alterations, along with a discursive examination of additional variables such as sampling niches, external interventions and methodologies. The phages that infect Conclusions: This systematic review focuses on findings and methodologies in oral phageome studies, which were conducted using highly heterogeneous methodologies that explored the oral phageome in multiple directions while placing constraints on quantitative statistics. Combining different kinds of sample types, utilizing the characteristics of different methods, involving both DNA and RNA phages, and differentiating lysogenic and lytic phages should be the distinction of further studies.

Indexed as

bioinformaticsmetagenomicsmethodologyOralphageome

Identifiers

PMID39420944
PMCPMC11485842

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.