Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34979559›Full record

ReviewILAR journal2021

Research-Relevant Conditions and Pathology of Laboratory Mice, Rats, Gerbils, Guinea Pigs, Hamsters, Naked Mole Rats, and Rabbits.

Timothy K Cooper, David K Meyerholz, Amanda P Beck, Martha A Delaney, Alessandra Piersigilli, Teresa L Southard, Cory F Brayton

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in ILAR journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Rodent Models of Lung Disease: A Road Map for Translational Research.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Time- and Gender-Dependent Alterations in Mice during the Aging Process.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Timothy K CooperDepartment of Comparative Medicine, Penn State Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, PA, USA.
David K MeyerholzDepartment of Pathology, University of Iowa Roy J. and Lucille A. Carver College of Medicine, Iowa City, Iowa, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1552-3253
Amanda P BeckDepartment of Pathology, Yeshiva University Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York, USA.
Martha A DelaneyZoological Pathology Program, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign College of Veterinary Medicine, Urbana-Champaign, Illinois, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8465-9958
Alessandra PiersigilliLaboratory of Comparative Pathology and the Genetically Modified Animal Phenotyping Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.
Teresa L SouthardDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Cornell University College of Veterinary Medicine, Ithaca, New York, USA.
Cory F BraytonDepartment of Molecular and Comparative Pathobiology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6666-6548

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI SELWYN M VICKERS · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Animals are valuable resources in biomedical research in investigations of biological processes, disease pathogenesis, therapeutic interventions, safety, toxicity, and carcinogenicity. Interpretation of data from animals requires knowledge not only of the processes or diseases (pathophysiology) under study but also recognition of spontaneous conditions and background lesions (pathology) that can influence or confound the study results. Species, strain/stock, sex, age, anatomy, physiology, spontaneous diseases (noninfectious and infectious), and neoplasia impact experimental results and interpretation as well as animal welfare. This review and the references selected aim to provide a pathology resource for researchers, pathologists, and veterinary personnel who strive to achieve research rigor and validity and must understand the spectrum of "normal" and expected conditions to accurately identify research-relevant experimental phenotypes as well as unusual illness, pathology, or other conditions that can compromise studies involving laboratory mice, rats, gerbils, guinea pigs, hamsters, naked mole rats, and rabbits.

Indexed as

Biological PhenomenaCommunicable DiseasesAnimalsCricetinaeGerbillinaeGuinea PigsMiceMole RatsRabbitsCricetinaeGerbillinaeguinea pigsmicemole ratsrabbitsrats

Identifiers

PMID34979559
PMCPMC9291387

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.