Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22131615›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of pharmaceutical sciences2011

Substitute of Animals in Drug Research: An Approach Towards Fulfillment of 4R's.

T Arora, A K Mehta, V Joshi, K D Mehta, N Rathor, P K Mediratta, K K Sharma

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Indian journal of pharmaceutical sciences, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 117 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Importance of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses of Animal Studies: Challenges for Animal-to-Human Translation.Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS · 2020
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Biomedicines · 2023
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Journal of obesity · 2023
    Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

T AroraDepartment of Pharmacology, University College of Medical Sciences, Delhi - 110 095, India.
A K Mehta
V Joshi
K D Mehta
N Rathor
P K Mediratta
K K Sharma
University College of Medical Sciences · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The preclinical studies for drug screening involve the use of animals which is very time consuming and expensive and at times leads to suffering of the used organism. Animal right activists around the world are increasingly opposing the use of animals. This has forced the researchers to find ways to not only decrease the time involved in drug screening procedures but also decrease the number of animals used and also increase the humane care of animals. To fulfill this goal a number of new in vitro techniques have been devised which are called 'Alternatives' or 'Substitutes' for use of animals in research involving drugs. These 'Alternatives' are defined as the adjuncts which help to decrease the use as well as the number of animals in biomedical research. Russell and Burch have defined these alternatives by three R's - Reduction, Refinement and Replacement. These alternative strategies include physico-chemical methods and techniques utilizing tissue culture, microbiological system, stem cells, DNA chips, micro fluidics, computer analysis models, epidemiological surveys and plant-tissue based materials. The advantages of these alternatives include the decrease in the number of animals used, ability to obtain the results quickly, reduction in the costs and flexibility to control the variables of the experiment. However these techniques are not glittering gold and have their own shortcomings. The disadvantages include the lack of an appropriate alternative to study the whole animal's metabolic response, inability to study transplant models and idiosyncratic responses and inability to study the body's handling of drugs and its subsequent metabolites. None-the-less these aalternative methods to certain extent help to reduce the number of animals required for research. But such alternatives cannot eliminate the need for animals in research completely. Even though no animal model is a complete set of replica for a process within a human body, the intact animal does provide a better model of the complex interaction of the physiological processes.

Indexed as

AlternativesDNA chipsin silico analysismicro dosingmicro fluidics

Identifiers

PMID22131615
PMCPMC3224398
OpenAlexW2040117433

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.