Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25780556›Full record

ReviewBiology of sex differences2014

NIH initiative to balance sex of animals in preclinical studies: generative questions to guide policy, implementation, and metrics.

Louise D McCullough, Geert J de Vries, Virginia M Miller, Jill B Becker, Kathryn Sandberg, Margaret M McCarthy

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biology of sex differences, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 62 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
62citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

62 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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
  3. Reporting of sex as a variable in cardiovascular studies using cultured cells: A systematic review.FASEB journal : official publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology · 2020
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Sex and the Developmental Environment Shape Molecular Networks Underlying Bronchial Responsiveness in Mice.FASEB journal : official publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Exploring heterogeneity: a dive into preclinical models of cancer cachexia.American journal of physiology. Cell physiology · 2024
    Review
  12. The Influence of BMP6 on Serotonin and Glucose Metabolism.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

2 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors.

Louise D McCulloughDepartment of Neurology and Neuroscience, The University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington 06030, CT, USA.
Geert J de VriesNeuroscience Institute, Georgia State University, Atlanta 30302, GA, USA.
Virginia M MillerDepartment of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St. SW, Rochester 55905, MN, USA ; Department of Physiology and Biomedical Engineering, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St. SW, Rochester 55905, MN, USA.
Jill B BeckerDepartment of Psychology and Molecular and Behavioral Neuroscience Institute, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor 48109, MI, USA.
Kathryn SandbergCenter for the study of Sex Differences in Health, Aging and Disease, Georgetown University, Washington 20057, DC, USA.
Margaret M McCarthyDepartment of Pharmacology and Program in Neuroscience, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore 21201, MD, USA.

Funding

Immune Modulation of HypertensionR01HL119380 · NHLBI · GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY · PI SANDBERG, KATHRYN L · 2015 to 2018
$2.4M
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL119380
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In May of 2014, the NIH Director together with the Director of the Office of Research on Women's Health announced plans to take a multi-dimensional approach to address the over reliance on male cells and animals in preclinical research. The NIH is engaging the scientific community in the development of policies to improve the sex balance in research. The present, past, and future presidents of the Organization for the Study of Sex Differences, in order to encourage thoughtful discussion among scientists, pose a series of questions to generate ideas in three areas: 1. research strategies, 2. educational strategies, and 3. strategies to monitor effectiveness of policies to improve the sex balance in research. By promoting discussion within the scientific community, a consensus will evolve that will move science forward in a productive and effective manner.

Indexed as

GenderSex differencesSexual dimorphism

Identifiers

PMID25780556
PMCPMC4360141

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.