ArticleEnvironmental microbiome2025
Microbiome data management in action workshop: Atlanta, GA, USA, June 12-13, 2024.
Article in Environmental microbiome, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The need for standardization and improved open (meta)data practices in metaproteomics.Microbiome · 2026Article
- STREAM-lining guidelines for microbiome research.Nature microbiology · 2025Article
- STREAMS guidelines: standards for technical reporting in environmental and host-associated microbiome studies.Nature microbiology · 2025Review
- A cost and community perspective on the barriers to microbiome data reuse.Frontiers in bioinformatics · 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
37 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Microbiome research is revolutionizing human and environmental health, but the value and reuse of microbiome data are significantly hampered by the limited development and adoption of data standards. While several ongoing efforts are aimed at improving microbiome data management, significant gaps still remain in terms of defining and promoting adoption of consensus standards for these datasets. The Strengthening the Organization and Reporting of Microbiome Studies (STORMS) guidelines for human microbiome research have been endorsed and successfully utilized by many research organizations, publishers, and funding agencies, and have been recognized as a consensus community standard. No equivalent effort has occurred for environmental, synthetic, and non-human host-associated microbiomes. To address this growing need within the microbiome research community, we convened the Microbiome Data Management in Action Workshop (June 12-13, 2024, in Atlanta, GA, USA), to bring together key decision makers in microbiome science including researchers, publishers, funders, and data repositories. The 50 attendees, representing the diverse and interdisciplinary nature of microbiome research, discussed recent progress and challenges, and brainstormed actionable recommendations and paths forward for coordinated environmental microbiome data management and the modifications necessary for the STORMS guidelines to be applied to environmental, non-human host, and synthetic microbiomes. The outcomes of this workshop will form the basis of a formalized data management roadmap to be implemented across the field. These best practices will drive scientific innovation now and in years to come as these data continue to be used not only in targeted reanalyses but in large-scale models and machine learning efforts.
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.