Evidence map›Paper›PMID 14527843›Full record

ReviewEnvironmental health perspectives2003

Comparable measures of cognitive function in human infants and laboratory animals to identify environmental health risks to children.

Carolyn Sharbaugh, Susan Marie Viet, Alexa Fraser, Suzanne B McMaster

Open access · diamondAbstract readComparative StudyReview
In one paragraph

Review in Environmental health perspectives, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Carolyn SharbaughWestat, Rockville, Maryland, USA.
Susan Marie Viet
Alexa Fraser
Suzanne B McMaster
Westat (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The importance of including neurodevelopmental end points in environmental studies is clear. A validated measure of cognitive function in human infants that also has a homologous or parallel test in laboratory animal studies will provide a valuable approach for large-scale studies. Such a comparable test will allow researchers to observe the effect of environmental neurotoxicants in animals and relate those findings to humans. In this article, we present the results of a review of post-1990, peer-reviewed literature and current research examining measures of cognitive function that can be applied to both human infants (0-12 months old) and laboratory animals. We begin with a discussion of the definition of cognitive function and important considerations in cross-species research. We then describe identified comparable measures, providing a description of the test in human infants and animal subjects. Available information on test reliability, validity, and population norms, as well as test limitations and constraints, is also presented.

Indexed as

Animals, LaboratoryChild DevelopmentDisease Models, AnimalAnimalsBehavior, AnimalCognition DisordersEnvironmental ExposureEnvironmental PollutantsHumansInfantInfant, NewbornReproducibility of ResultsRisk AssessmentEnvironmental Pollutants

Identifiers

PMID14527843
PMCPMC1241686
OpenAlexW1994878903

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.