Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18499465›Full record

ReviewNeurobiology of disease2008

Towards developing standard operating procedures for pre-clinical testing in the mdx mouse model of Duchenne muscular dystrophy.

Miranda D Grounds, Hannah G Radley, Gordon S Lynch, Kanneboyina Nagaraju, Annamaria De Luca

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Neurobiology of disease, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 172 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
172citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

172 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Age-Dependent Effect of Myostatin Blockade in theMuscles (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

112 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors.

Miranda D GroundsSchool of Anatomy and Human Biology, the University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia. mgrounds@anhb.uwa.edu.au
Hannah G Radley
Gordon S Lynch
Kanneboyina Nagaraju
Annamaria De Luca

Funding

Wellstone Muscular Dystrophy Center: Children's Nat'l Med CtrU54HD053177 · NICHD · CHILDREN'S RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI HOFFMAN, ERIC P. · 2005 to 2009
$7.3M
NICHD NIH HHS U54 HD053177Telethon GGP05130
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review discusses various issues to consider when developing standard operating procedures for pre-clinical studies in the mdx mouse model of Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD). The review describes and evaluates a wide range of techniques used to measure parameters of muscle pathology in mdx mice and identifies some basic techniques that might comprise standardised approaches for evaluation. While the central aim is to provide a basis for the development of standardised procedures to evaluate efficacy of a drug or a therapeutic strategy, a further aim is to gain insight into pathophysiological mechanisms in order to identify other therapeutic targets. The desired outcome is to enable easier and more rigorous comparison of pre-clinical data from different laboratories around the world, in order to accelerate identification of the best pre-clinical therapies in the mdx mouse that will fast-track translation into effective clinical treatments for DMD.

Indexed as

AnimalsClinical Laboratory TechniquesDisease Models, AnimalMiceMice, Inbred mdxMuscle, SkeletalMuscular Dystrophy, Duchenne

Identifiers

PMID18499465
PMCPMC2518169

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.