Evidence map›Paper›PMID 1598753›Full record

ReviewVeterinary research communications1992

Eosinophils: a review.

B J McEwen

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Veterinary research communications, 1992. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Therapeutic effects ofAnimal models and experimental medicine · 2019
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

1 author.

B J McEwenDepartment of Pathology, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The eosinophil was discovered by Jones in 1846 (Dessein and David, 1982) but its proclivity to stain with aniline dyes was first described by Paul Ehrlich in 1879 (Hirsch and Hirsch, 1980). Recognized and named for this quality, eosinophils possess an abundance of highly basic proteins within their granules which confer their affinity for acidic dyes (Gleich and Loegering, 1984). Eosinophils are traditionally viewed as killer-effector cells in parasitic infestations and as modulators of Type I hypersensitivity reactions (Butterworth and David, 1981; Kay, 1985). The eosinophils' reserve of cationic proteins and enzymes which imparts their profound parasiticidal effects (Butterworth and David, 1981) contrasts with this leukocyte's purported regulatory function in inflammation (Kay, 1985; Fechter et al., 1986). The opposing functions possessed by this leukocyte exemplify the enigma of the eosinophil. Recent evidence suggests that although the eosinophil does posses some regulatory capabilities, its presence is, in fact, a harbinger of tissue destruction (Gleich and Adolphoson, 1986, Wardlaw and Kay, 1987; Spry, 1988). Nor does the presence of the eosinophil automatically infer IgE mediated hypersensitivity, as evidenced by studies examining the interaction of the eosinophil with the cellular arm of the immune system (Basten and Beeson, 1970; Ruscetti et al., 1976; Beeson and Bass, 1977; Raghavachar et al., 1987; Ohnishi et al., 1988). The purpose of this review is to provide a brief overview of the structure and biology of the mammalian eosinophil and to emphasize the fact that eosinophils fulfil a paradoxical role as effectors of tissue damage and as benign modulators of inflammation.

Indexed as

AnimalsEosinophilsHumans

Identifiers

PMID1598753

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.