Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26371049›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2015

Lipidomics to Assess Omega 3 Bioactivity.

Francesco Visioli

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Francesco VisioliDepartment of Molecular Medicine, University of Padova, Via 8 Febbraio, 2-35122 Padova, Italy. francesco.visioli@unipd.it.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

How can we resolve the conflict between the strong epidemiological evidence pointing to the usefulness of fish-and, thus, omega 3-consumption with the debacle of supplementation trials? One potential explanation is that the null results obtained thus far are the consequences of ill-contrived investigations that do not allow us to conclude on the effects (or lack thereof) of omega 3 fatty acid supplementation. One potential solution is through the use of lipidomics, which should prove very useful to screen suitable patients and to correlate plasma (or red blood cells, or whole blood, or phospholipid) fatty acid profile with outcomes. This has never been done in omega 3 trials. The wise use of lipidomics should be essential part of future omega 3 trials and would help in untangling this current riddle.

Indexed as

cardiovascular diseaseclinical trialslipid analysislipidomelipidomicsomega 3 fatty acids

Identifiers

PMID26371049
PMCPMC4600157

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.