ArticleFrontiers in microbiomes2024
Optimisation of the sampling method for skin microbiome studies in healthy children: a pilot cohort study.
Article in Frontiers in microbiomes, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Wounds and the Microbiota: The Healing Interplay Between Host and Microbial Communities.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Microbiome diversity of low biomass skin sites is captured by metagenomics but not 16S amplicon sequencing.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- An Overview of the Skin Microbiome, the Potential for Pathogen Shift, and Dysbiosis in Common Skin Pathologies.Microorganisms · 2025Review
- Advancing periodontitis microbiome research: integrating design, analysis, and technology.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025Review
- Editorial: Skin microbiome: microbiological, immunological and cellular aspects for therapies to control antimicrobial resistance and skin repair.Frontiers in cellular and infection 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Recent interest in the diverse ecosystem of bacteria, fungi and viruses that make up the skin microbiome has led to numerous studies investigating the skin microbiome in healthy skin and in dermatological conditions. However, skin microbiome analysis is challenging due to relatively low numbers of skin microorganisms compared to mucosal sites, such as the respiratory or gastrointestinal tracts. Microbiome results are heavily influenced by sampling methods. Previous sampling methods include that of cotton swabs, tape stripping, patch sampling and punch biopsies. It is essential to have a standardised sampling method for microbiome studies to have comparable results between studies. Two non-invasive methods of sampling the skin microbiome; a skin scraping versus a flocked swab were chosen as methodologies likely to be efficient, effective, and easy to access for future skin microbiome studies in children. Here we compare the two sampling methods to describe the composition of the skin microbiome in healthy children. Method: Samples were collected from six healthy children aged three to nine years from the skin overlying the cubital fossa, cheek and axilla using (i) flocked swabs and (ii) skin scrapings with a glass slide. Samples were collected from the left and right sides of the body at two separate time points, one week apart. Quantitative PCR of the gene encoding 16S ribosomal ribonucleic acid (rRNA) was performed to compare the bacterial load collected by each sampling method. Full-length 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing was performed to compare the relationship of sampling method and time with the diversity and ecology of bacteria between different body sites. Results: From six children, 78 flocked swabs and 78 skin scraping samples were collected, along with details of their overall health and skin care practices. qPCR results indicated higher total bacterial load from flocked swabs compared with skin scrapings. Flocked swabs and skin scraping methods had very similar bacterial compositional profiles. The skin microbiome was diverse between individuals and remained relatively stable within individuals over time. Discussion: Overall, results were similar between sample types, however bacterial DNA yield was higher for flocked swab samples (compared to skin scraping methods) and with a simpler protocol is the preferred sampling method for future studies.
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.