Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 310

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Temporal Stability in Chronic Wound Microbiota Is Associated With Poor Healing

Open access
Loesche, Michael, Gardner, Sue E., Kalan, Lindsay, Horwinski, Joseph, Zheng, Qi, Hodkinson, Brendan P., Tyldsley, Amanda S., Franciscus, Carrie L., Hillis, Stephen L., Mehta, Samir, Margolis, David J., Grice, Elizabeth A.·2017·Journal of Investigative Dermatology

Abstract

Microbial burden of chronic wounds is believed to play an important role in impaired healing and development of infection-related complications. However, clinical cultures have little predictive value of wound outcomes, and culture-independent studies have been limited by cross-sectional design and small cohort size. We systematically evaluated the temporal dynamics of the microbiota colonizing diabetic foot ulcers (DFU), a common and costly complication of diabetes, and its association with healing and clinical complications. Dirichlet multinomial mixture modeling, Markov chain analysis, and mixed-effect models were used to investigate shifts in the microbiota over time and its associations with healing. Here we show to our knowledge previously unreported temporal dynamics of the chronic wound microbiome. Microbiota community instability was associated with faster healing and improved outcomes. DFU microbiota were found to exist in one of four community types that experienced frequent and non-random transitions. Transition patterns and frequencies associated with healing time. Exposure to systemic antibiotics destabilized the wound microbiota, rather than altering overall diversity or relative abundance of specific taxa. This study provides to our knowledge previously unreported evidence that the dynamic wound microbiome is indicative of clinical outcomes and may be a valuable guide for personalized management and treatment of chronic wounds.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jid.2016.08.009

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 12 references

Cited by

See all 310

Metadata

Authors
Loesche, M., Gardner, S. E., Kalan, L., Horwinski, J., Zheng, Q., Hodkinson, B. P., Tyldsley, A. S., Franciscus, C. L., Hillis, S. L., Mehta, S., Margolis, D. J., & Grice, E. A.
Venue
Journal of Investigative Dermatology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-01
Volume
137
Issue
1
Pages
237-244
ISSN
0022-202X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2513592334
Cited by
310
References
12
FWCI
18.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Temporal Stability in Chronic Wound Microbiota Is Associated With Poor Healing. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jid.2016.08.009
The paper
Loesche, M., Gardner, S. E., Kalan, L., Horwinski, J., Zheng, Q., Hodkinson, B. P., Tyldsley, A. S., Franciscus, C. L., Hillis, S. L., Mehta, S., Margolis, D. J., & Grice, E. A. (2017). Temporal Stability in Chronic Wound Microbiota Is Associated With Poor Healing. Journal of Investigative Dermatology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jid.2016.08.009

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.