ReviewBiology2024
Artificial Feeding Systems for Vector-Borne Disease Studies.
Review in Biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Why we need more individual-based parasite research.Parasites & vectors · 2026Review
- Not all West Nile virus lineages behave alike: dose-response differences between lineages 1 and 2.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Bridging laboratory and field research: Method adjustments to blood feed field-derived Aedes aegypti.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2026Article
- Evaluation of various membranes for blood-feeding in nine sand fly species and artificial feeding challenges in Sergentomyia minuta.Parasites & vectors · 2025Article
- Why the Jenner/Pasteur paradigm is insufficient for controlling vector-borne diseases and the role of microbiota-mediated interactions.Current research in parasitology & vector-borne diseases · 2025Review
- Laboratory maintenance and care of Rhodnius prolixus (Hemiptera: Reduviidae) and other Triatominae.Journal of medical entomology · 2024Article
- Evaluation of the Blood Feeding Preference of Aedes aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae) when Offered Diabetic and Non-Diabetic Blood.Acta parasitologica · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
This review examines the advancements and methodologies of artificial feeding systems for the study of vector-borne diseases, offering a critical assessment of their development, advantages, and limitations relative to traditional live host models. It underscores the ethical considerations and practical benefits of such systems, including minimizing the use of live animals and enhancing experimental consistency. Various artificial feeding techniques are detailed, including membrane feeding, capillary feeding, and the utilization of engineered biocompatible materials, with their respective applications, efficacy, and the challenges encountered with their use also being outlined. This review also forecasts the integration of cutting-edge technologies like biomimicry, microfluidics, nanotechnology, and artificial intelligence to refine and expand the capabilities of artificial feeding systems. These innovations aim to more accurately simulate natural feeding conditions, thereby improving the reliability of studies on the transmission dynamics of vector-borne diseases. This comprehensive review serves as a foundational reference for researchers in the field, proposing a forward-looking perspective on the potential of artificial feeding systems to revolutionize vector-borne disease research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.