Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40232948›Full record

ArticleMicrobial genomics2025

Consensus approach to differential abundance analysis detects few differences in the oral microbiome of pregnant women due to pre-existing type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Sophie M Leech, Helen L Barrett, Emily S Dorey, Thomas Mullins, Josephine Laurie, Marloes Dekker Nitert

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Microbial genomics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. 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

6 authors.

Sophie M LeechSchool of Chemistry and Molecular Biosciences, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD 4072, Australia.
Helen L BarrettObstetric Medicine, Royal Hospital for Women, Randwick, NSW, Australia.
Emily S DoreyMater Research Institute, The University of Queensland, South Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Thomas MullinsMater Research Institute, The University of Queensland, South Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Josephine LaurieObstetric Medicine, Mater Health, South Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Marloes Dekker NitertSchool of Chemistry and Molecular Biosciences, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD 4072, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Oral microbiome dysbiosis has been proposed as a potential contributing factor to rising rates of diabetes in pregnancy, with oral health previously associated with an increased risk of numerous chronic diseases and complications in pregnancy, including gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). However, whilst most studies examining the relationship between GDM and the oral microbiome identify significant differences, these differences are highly variable between studies. Additionally, no previous research has examined the oral microbiome of women with pre-existing type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), which has greater risks of complications to both mother and baby. In this study, we compared the oral microbiome of 11 pregnant women with pre-existing T2DM with 28 pregnant normoglycaemic controls. We used shotgun metagenomic sequencing to examine buccal swab and saliva rinse samples at two time points between 26 and 38 weeks of gestation. To reduce variation caused by the choice of differential abundance analysis tool, we employed a consensus approach to identify differential taxa and pathways due to diabetes status. Differences were identified at the late time point only. In swab samples, there was increased

Indexed as

BacteriaDiabetes, GestationalDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2MicrobiotaMouthAdultDysbiosisFemaleHumansMetagenomicsPregnancySalivadiabetes mellitusdifferential abundance analysisoral microbiome

Identifiers

PMID40232948
PMCPMC12282217

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.