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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

1. An in-depth review on antimicrobial efficacy of melittin in vivo.World journal of microbiology & biotechnology · 2026
   Review
2. A journal that grows older and stays young.Journal of bacteriology · 2026
   Article
3. Minute-scale control of ubiquitin-mediated degradation reveals dynamics of bacterial secreted effector-functions.Nature communications · 2026
   Article
4. Infection and immunity · 2026
   Article
5. Laboratory detection methods for Chlamydia trachomatis infection in children: a review.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2026
   Review
6. Comparative transcriptomic profiling of human conjunctival epithelial cells and macrophages in response toFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026
   Article

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Funding

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as