Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39170948›Full record

ReviewEnvironment & health (Washington, D.C.)2024

Canine on the Couch: The New Canary in the Coal Mine for Environmental Health Research.

Catherine F Wise, Matthew Breen, Heather M Stapleton

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Environment & health (Washington, D.C.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. 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

3 authors.

Catherine F WiseNicholas School of the Environment, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27708, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6294-0426
Matthew BreenDepartment of Molecular Biomedical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, North Carolina State University, 1060 William Moore Drive, Raleigh, North Carolina 27607, United States.
Heather M StapletonNicholas School of the Environment, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27708, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9995-6517

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Human health is intimately connected and tied to the health of our environment and ecosystem, with only a very small fraction of the risk for chronic diseases explained by genetics alone. Companion animals are prone to disease types that are shared with people, including cancers and endocrine disorders, reinforcing the thought that environmental factors contribute to the risks for chronic diseases. These factors include air and water pollution and the built environment. As such, there is increasing interest in pursuing research with companion animals, and specifically dogs, as sentinel species to inform comparative health assessments and identify risk factors for disease. Of the canine diseases for which environmental exposure research has been published, cancers have received the most attention. This review summarizes two main aspects of this comparative approach: (1) cancers that occur in dogs and which are similar to humans and (2) research investigating environmental exposures and health outcomes in dogs. The goal of this review is to highlight the diverse conditions in which pet dogs may provide unique perspectives and advantages to examine relationships between environmental exposures and health outcomes, with an emphasis on chemical pollution and cancer. Furthermore, this review seeks to raise awareness and stimulate discussion around the best practices for the use of companion animals as environmental health sentinels.

Identifiers

PMID39170948
PMCPMC11334179

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.