Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22071879›Full record

ReviewMammalian genome : official journal of the International Mammalian Genome Society2012

DNA testing and domestic dogs.

Cathryn Mellersh

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Mammalian genome : official journal of the International Mammalian Genome Society, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Approaches to canine health surveillance.Canine genetics and epidemiology · 2014
    Review
  12. Article
  13. A web resource on DNA tests for canine and feline hereditary diseases.Veterinary journal (London, England : 1997) · 2013
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Inherited retinal diseases in dogs: advances in gene/mutation discovery.Dobutsu iden ikushu kenkyu = Journal of animal genetics
    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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Cathryn MellershCanine Genetics, Animal Health Trust, Lanwades Park, Kentford, Newmarket, Suffolk CB8 7UU, UK. cathryn.mellersh@aht.org.uk
Animal Health Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There are currently about 80 different DNA tests available for mutations that are associated with inherited disease in the domestic dog, and as the tools available with which to dissect the canine genome become increasingly sophisticated, this number can be expected to rise dramatically over the next few years. With unrelenting media pressure focused firmly on the health of the purebred domestic dog, veterinarians and dog breeders are turning increasingly to DNA tests to ensure the health of their dogs. It is ultimately the responsibility of the scientists who identify disease-associated genetic variants to make sensible choices about which discoveries are appropriate to develop into commercially available DNA tests for the lay dog breeder, who needs to balance the need to improve the genetic health of their breed with the need to maintain genetic diversity. This review discusses some of the factors that should be considered along the route from mutation discovery to DNA test and some representative examples of DNA tests currently available.

Indexed as

AnimalsBreedingDNADog DiseasesDogsGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseGenetic TestingGenetic VariationGenomeMutationDNA

Identifiers

PMID22071879
PMCPMC3275738
OpenAlexW2014523157

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.