ArticleIranian journal of microbiology2024
Article in Iranian journal of microbiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Background and Objectives: Leprosy foot ulcers (LFU) tend to become chronic due to secondary bacterial infections, leading to subsequent disfigurement and disability. Treatment modality for infected plantar ulcers thus so far is majorly based on conventional approach of empirical antibacterial therapy. However, this approach tends to overlook unconventional pathogens which are likely to be present in the LFU. Materials and Methods: Twenty-six leprosy patients (17 males and 9 females) who had completed multidrug therapy (MDT) and those are suffering from foot ulcer were included. Using sterile cotton swabs, two wound swabs were collected, of these; one for bacterial culture and another for NGS (Next Generation Sequencing). Results: Out of 26 samples tested on conventional bacterial culture, Conclusion: Polymicrobial infection with conventional and unconventional pathogenic bacteria is another notable finding suggesting appropriate interventions. The study findings also reiterate the need for understanding the polymicrobial infections and their role in the clinical progression of the LFU.
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.