ArticleClinical and experimental immunology2012
Viruses and type 1 diabetes: ignorance acquires a better vocabulary.
Article in Clinical and experimental immunology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Immunological biomarkers: catalysts for translational advances in autoimmune diabetes.Clinical and experimental immunology · 2013Article
- Progress in immune-based therapies for type 1 diabetes.Clinical and experimental immunology · 2013Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The hypothesis that a virus might in some way be involved in the causation of type 1 diabetes has a long history, but decades of research have failed to resolve the issue beyond reasonable doubt. Viruses could potentially play a primary role in the pathogenesis of type 1 diabetes by initiating autoimmunity, a secondary role by promoting established immune responses, or a tertiary role by precipitating the onset of hyperglycaemia. There is currently little evidence to suggest that viruses play a primary role in the causation of type 1 diabetes, let alone a necessary or sufficient role. Secondary or tertiary roles remain possible, but have yet to be confirmed in prospective studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.