ArticleMedical hypotheses2012
TB infection in the nonhuman primate biomedical model: tip of the iceberg?
Article in Medical hypotheses, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- How well do you know your monkey TB model?Journal of medical primatology · 2013Article
- Naturally acquired Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex in laboratory pig-tailed macaques.Emerging microbes & infections · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Biomedical research in the 21st century increasingly relies on pathogen-free nonhuman primates (NHPs) to model human pathophysiology. Despite adherence to protocols designed to maintain pathogen-free colonies, reports of tuberculosis regularly appear. We hypothesize that, undetected by standard screening protocols, mycobacteria of the Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex (MTBC) continue to circulate in established NHP colonies and may, in addition, be periodically reintroduced with newly imported animals. The tuberculin skin test (TST), the accepted standard screening test for tuberculosis, relies on the host's immune response to detect infection, but empirical data suggest that TST lacks both specificity and, particularly in certain NHP species and in immune compromised animals, sensitivity. In order to improve the detection of MTBC infection in NHP colonies we propose new screening protocols that incorporate molecular methods to detect mycobacteria. These new tests do not rely on the host's immune response and may allow for strain typing of the pathogens - enhancing our ability to elucidate patterns of disease transmission. Moreover, the ability to rapidly and noninvasively collect specimens could lead to an improved appreciation of the burden of MTBC circulating in populations of NHPs and humans, including drug-resistant strains, data that are invaluable to public health efforts.
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.