ReviewPathogens (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Seeing Bacterial Persistence Through Different Experimental Lenses: How Methodology Shapes Biological Interpretation.
Review in Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland), 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Bacterial persister cells are a rare subpopulation that survives antibiotic treatment without acquiring heritable resistance. Despite decades of research, concepts of bacterial persistence have evolved alongside experimental methods, yet the mechanisms underlying persistence remain debated, and different approaches often lead to seemingly conflicting conclusions. In this Review, we argue that these discrepancies arise not only from the heterogeneity of persister cells but also from differences in experimental methodology and biological context. We present persistence as a dynamic continuum extending from the physiological state preceding antibiotic exposure, through survival during treatment, recovery after antibiotic removal, and clonal expansion. We examine how experimental approaches-including CFU assays, population-based analyses, fluorescence microscopy, microfluidics, enrichment strategies, and cell sorting-interrogate different stages of this continuum, thereby addressing distinct biological questions rather than providing equivalent views of persistence. We further discuss how experimental context shapes the populations available for analysis and influences the interpretation of persistence phenotypes. Seemingly conflicting observations often arise from different experimental frameworks, each revealing a distinct aspect of bacterial persistence. Combining approaches that interrogate different stages of the continuum can strengthen persister identification and mechanistic interpretation. Recognizing these complementary perspectives is essential for accurately interpreting persistence and integrating findings across 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.