ArticleScientific reports2025
Skin Staphylococcus aureus detection and relationship to atopic dermatitis outcomes using culture and metagenomic sequencing.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Staphylococcus aureus in atopic dermatitis: How a common bacterium exploits and drives disease.The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Staphylococcus aureus (SA) skin colonization in pediatric atopic dermatitis (AD) increases risk for severe AD and development of other allergic diseases. Despite this, there is no consensus regarding the optimal method to detect SA. Studies comparing metagenomic shotgun sequencing (MSS) and culture-based methods in SA detection and relationships to AD outcomes are lacking. In the Mechanisms of Progression of Atopic Dermatitis to Asthma in Children (MPAACH) cohort, we defined SA colonization categories by contact agar plate sampling/culture and skin tape sampling/MSS: double negative, sequencing only positive, contact plate only positive, and double positive (n = 759). We assessed AD severity, sensitization, total IgE, and atopic outcomes across categories. Culture missed 69% of samples detected by MSS and MSS missed 54% of samples detected by culture. The double positive group exhibited higher AD severity, sensitization load, and total serum IgE, and was more likely to develop allergic rhinitis (AR) compared to other groups. Detection of SA by MSS or culture missed over half of the SA detected by the other method. Importantly, detection via both methods correlated with increased AD severity, sensitization, total IgE, and AR. Thus, these methods are complementary and both may be necessary for comprehensive evaluation of SA and its clinical and biologic impact.
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.