Missing evidence that animal research benefits humans: moratorium is unjustified.

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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Developing more inclusive approaches to animal research and patient involvement.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2025
   Article
2. A scoping review of ethical decisions and decision tools for experimental animal protocols.BMC medical ethics · 2025
   Article
3. Effects of exercise cessation on adipose tissue physiological markers related to fat regain: A systematic review.SAGE open medicine · 2020
   Review
4. They see a rat, we seek a cure for diseases: the current status of animal experimentation in medical practice.Medical principles and practice : international journal of the Kuwait University, Health Science Centre · 2013
   Review
5. Parkinson's disease and primate research: past, present, and future.Postgraduate medical journal · 2006
   Review

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Where is the evidence that animal research benefits humans?2004

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as