Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25270874›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of experimental pathology2014

What do mouse models of muscular dystrophy tell us about the DAPC and its components?

Charlotte Whitmore, Jennifer Morgan

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of experimental pathology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Skeletal muscle in health and disease.Disease models & mechanisms · 2020
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Overview of the Muscle Cytoskeleton.Comprehensive Physiology · 2017
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Current Progress in Therapeutic Gene Editing for Monogenic Diseases.Molecular therapy : the journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy · 2016
    Review
  14. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Charlotte WhitmoreDubowitz Neuromuscular Centre, Molecular Neurosciences Section, Developmental Neurosciences Programme, Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, UK.
Jennifer Morgan
Institute of Child Health · INUniversity College London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There are over 30 mouse models with mutations or inactivations in the dystrophin-associated protein complex. This complex is thought to play a crucial role in the functioning of muscle, as both a shock absorber and signalling centre, although its role in the pathogenesis of muscular dystrophy is not fully understood. The first mouse model of muscular dystrophy to be identified with a mutation in a component of the dystrophin-associated complex (dystrophin) was the mdx mouse in 1984. Here, we evaluate the key characteristics of the mdx in comparison with other mouse mutants with inactivations in DAPC components, along with key modifiers of the disease phenotype. By discussing the differences between the individual phenotypes, we show that the functioning of the DAPC and consequently its role in the pathogenesis is more complicated than perhaps currently appreciated.

Indexed as

Disease Models, AnimalMice, Inbred mdxMice, KnockoutMuscular DystrophiesAnimalsDystroglycansDystrophinHumansMultiprotein Complexesapo-dystrophin 1DystroglycansDystrophinMultiprotein Complexesdystroglycandystrophinmdxmouse modelsmuscular dystrophy

Identifiers

PMID25270874
PMCPMC4285463
OpenAlexW2036961361

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.