ReviewFrontiers in microbiology2026
Toward standardized environmental detection of antibiotics and ARGs for regulatory interpretation and concern tiering.
Review in Frontiers in microbiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Environmental detection of antimicrobial resistance has expanded rapidly, but many programs still treat detection of antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs) or resistant bacteria as the primary endpoint. As a result, outputs are often only weakly linked to antibiotic exposure conditions and remain difficult to compare, interpret, and use consistently for follow-up decisions. This review examines how detection of antibiotics and ARG/ARB can be standardized for regulatory interpretation and qualitative concern tiering. It defines standardization across pre-analytical, analytical, data, and interpretive layers; proposes a minimum detection package; and describes how comparison-ready chemical and biological outputs can support integrated interpretation. It also reviews chromatographic, sequencing, biosensor, and other recognition-based platforms, arguing that platform choice should match screening, confirmation, quantification, or discovery roles. This review then outlines a four-tier framework for concern and decision priority, together with reporting and implementation elements needed to translate detection results into proportionate follow-up. Environmental AMR detection becomes more useful when antibiotic exposure, ARG/ARB evidence, and contextual information are standardized and interpreted together rather than handled as separate streams.
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.