Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20488255›Full record

ReviewProgress in retinal and eye research2010

Animal models of choroidal and retinal neovascularization.

Hans E Grossniklaus, Shin J Kang, Lennart Berglin

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Progress in retinal and eye research, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 206 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
206citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Animal Models of Choroidal Neovascularization: A Systematic Review.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2022
    Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review

146 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

3 authors.

Hans E GrossniklausDepartment of Ophthalmology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA. ophtheg@emory.edu
Shin J Kang
Lennart Berglin

Funding

P30-Core Grant for Vision Research Core CP30EY006360 · NEI · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI NICKERSON, JOHN M · 1986 to 2025
$15.3M
Transscleral Drug Delivery for Retinal DisordersR24EY017045 · NEI · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI EDELHAUSER, HENRY FRANCIS · 2006 to 2010
$6.9M
NEI NIH HHS P30 EY006360NEI NIH HHS P30EY06360NEI NIH HHS R24 EY017045NEI NIH HHS R24EY017045
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There have been numerous types of animal models of choroidal neovascularization (CNV) and retinal neovascularization (RNV). Understanding the pathobiology of CNV and RNV is important when evaluating and utilizing these models. Both CNV and RNV are dynamic processes. A break or defect in Bruchs' membrane is necessary for CNV to develop. This may be induced with a laser, mechanically via surgery, or in the setting of transgenic mice. Some of the transgenic mouse models spontaneously develop RNV and/or retinal angiomatous proliferation (RAP)-like lesions. The pathogenesis of RNV is well-known and is generally related to ischemic retinopathy. Models of oxygen-induced retinopathy (OIR) closely resemble retinopathy of prematurity (ROP). The streptozotocin (STZ) rat model develops features similar to diabetic retinopathy. This review summarizes general categories and specific examples of animal models of CNV and RNV. There are no perfect models of CNV or RNV and individual investigators are encouraged to choose the model that best suits their needs.

Indexed as

Choroidal NeovascularizationDisease Models, AnimalRetinal NeovascularizationAnimalsHumans

Identifiers

PMID20488255
PMCPMC2962694

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.