Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23087669›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neurology2012

Advanced pre-clinical research approaches and models to studying pediatric anesthetic neurotoxicity.

Cheng Wang

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 34% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. 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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Cheng WangDivision of Neurotoxicology, National Center for Toxicological Research, United States Food and Drug Administration Jefferson, AR, USA.
National Center for Toxicological Research · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Advances in pediatric and obstetric surgery have resulted in an increase in the duration and complexity of anesthetic procedures. A great deal of concern has recently arisen regarding the safety of anesthesia in infants and children. Because of obvious limitations, it is not possible to thoroughly explore the effects of anesthetic agents on neurons in vivo in human infants or children. However, the availability of some advanced pre-clinical research approaches and models, such as imaging technology both in vitro and in vivo, stem cells, and non-human primate experimental models, have provided potentially invaluable tools for examining the developmental effects of anesthetic agents. This review discusses the potential application of some sophisticated research approaches, e.g., calcium imaging, in stem cell-derived in vitro models, especially human embryonic neural stem cells, along with their capacity for proliferation and their potential for differentiation, to dissect relevant mechanisms underlying the etiology of the neurotoxicity associated with developmental exposures to anesthetic agents. Also, this review attempts to discuss several advantages for using the developing rhesus monkey model (in vivo), when combined with dynamic molecular imaging approaches, in addressing critical issues related to the topic of pediatric sedation/anesthesia. These include the relationships between anesthetic-induced neurotoxicity, dose response, time-course, and developmental stage at time of exposure (in vivo studies), serving to provide the most expeditious platform toward decreasing the uncertainty in extrapolating pre-clinical data to the human condition.

Indexed as

anesthesiadevelopmentimagingmechanismneurotoxicity

Identifiers

PMID23087669
PMCPMC3473308
OpenAlexW2054027313

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.