Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25947344›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of physiology. Renal physiology2015

One physiology does not fit all: a path from data variability to "physiogenetics"?

Jurgen Schnermann

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of physiology. Renal physiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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.

Jurgen SchnermannKidney Disease Branch, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland jurgens@intra.niddk.nih.gov.

Funding

Intramural NIH HHS
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Data variability is a costly complication of biomedical experimentation because the same experiment must be repeated a sufficient number of times so that the sample mean becomes a credible representation of the entire population. Since sampling is ideally done randomly in populations normalized for environmental and genetic backgrounds, data variability is viewed as a purely statistical issue reflecting the distribution in the population and captured as the standard deviation of the sampled data. The factors contributing to data variability are not analyzed by statistical methods; for want of a better explanation, data scatter is simply attributed to random noise and/or methodological limitations. In this commentary, evidence is discussed that documents an important role of interindividual biological diversity as a cause for data variability based on studies in which repeated sampling in the same individual permitted statistical comparisons between individuals in the same sample. Significant differences were found for proximal fluid reabsorption and plasma renin concentration between sample means of individuals of the same population. Furthermore, arterial blood pressure varied significantly between individual mice independently of strain and sex. Recognition of the extent of interindividual variability has important implications for data reproducibility, data collection, and data presentation in physiological research. Such nonrandom data variability may have different causes, but DNA modifications by genetic or epigenetic mechanisms could generate phenotype variants without being associated with disease symptoms. Exploration of the heritability of phenotypical diversity in physiology may be defined as "physiogenetics," and it would thus be the physiological corollary of pharmacogenetics and pharmacogenomics.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchBlood PressureIndividualityRenal ReabsorptionAnimalsPhenotypeReninReninbiodiversityoutlierpersonalized physiologysample size

Identifiers

PMID25947344
PMCPMC4490378

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.