ReviewPHAGE (New Rochelle, N.Y.)2024
Between Centralization and Fragmentation: The Past, Present, and Future of Phage Collections.
Review in PHAGE (New Rochelle, N.Y.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Precision phage therapy in the AI/ML era: a systematic review of discovery-to-clinical translation evidence.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Pooled it
- Review
- Reimagining Phage Therapy for MDR Pathogens: From Biobanks to Health System Integration-A Review.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2026Review
- Article
- The Role of Genomics in Advancing and Standardising Bacteriophage Therapy.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Phage biobanks as enabling infrastructure for precision phage therapy in the era of antimicrobial resistance.Frontiers in antibiotics · 2026Article
- Comprehensive analysis of phage genomes from diverse environments reveals their diversity, potential applications, and interactions with hosts and other phages.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite over a century of collecting bacteriophages, there has been a persistent lack of interest in systematically cataloging resulting phage banks. The result was a situation in which the ongoing growth of phage infrastructures was paralleled by an increasing fragmentation of knowledge about collections' contents and existence. Over the last two decades, renewed interest in phage therapy and phage biology has further exacerbated confusion amid a rapid increase in the number of large and small phage collections and an ongoing dearth of coordination and standardized cataloging. Whatever the modalities (isolated phages or genomes), the time has undoubtedly come to create sustainable, interconnected, and equitable phage banking infrastructures. This article reviews both the history and current status of microbial collections, provides a nonexhaustive overview of relevant phage collections, and reflects on the challenges and potential of centralizing therapeutically relevant collections ahead of likely paradigm shifts caused by synthetic biology and artificial intelligence.
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.