Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11487519›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of pharmacology2001

A comparison of effects measured with isotonic and isometric recording: I. Concentration-effect curves for agonists.

R B Barlow, S M Bond, C Grant, D S McQueen, Z Yaqoob

Erratum issuedOpen access · bronzeAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of pharmacology, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 41% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

  • Erratum issued
5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

R B BarlowDepartment of Neuroscience, 1 George Square, Edinburgh EH8 9JZ, Scotland, UK.
S M Bond
C Grant
D S McQueen
Z Yaqoob
University of Edinburgh · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Concentration-effect curves were obtained with carbachol tested on isolated preparations of guinea-pig ileum taken from adjacent sites in the same animal, one recorded isotonically, the other isometrically: similar experiments were made with histamine as agonist and with carbachol on rat uterus (in oestrus). The position and steepness of the curves was expressed as the values of [EC(50)] and the exponent, P: with carbachol or histamine on guinea-pig ileum the curves were significantly steeper with isotonic recording (P<0.02, sign test) and displaced towards lower concentrations (P<0.005) but there were significant correlations (P<0.05) between values obtained with tissues from the same animal. The curves for carbachol on the rat uterus were very steep: with isotonic recording the exponent (often eight or more) was consistently higher than with isometric (P<0.001): there was no significant displacement but there was a significant correlation (P<0.05) between values of [EC(50)] obtained with tissues from the same animal. Although the results obtained by the two methods are different, they are correlated. These effects are to be expected because with isotonic recording there can be no change in length until the tension exceeds the load and the tissue bulk sets an upper limit to shortening: the range within which an effect can be measured (the "operational window") is smaller. The observed effects on [EC(50)] and P have been reproduced with theoretical data.

Indexed as

AnimalsCarbacholDose-Response Relationship, DrugFemaleGuinea PigsHistamineIleumIn Vitro TechniquesIsometric ContractionIsotonic ContractionRatsRats, WistarUterusCarbacholHistamine

Identifiers

PMID11487519
PMCPMC1572874
OpenAlexW2054571156

What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.