Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26495842›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Worse Health Status and Higher Incidence of Health Disorders in Rhesus Negative Subjects.

Jaroslav Flegr, Rudolf Hoffmann, Mike Dammann

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Beyond Latency: ChronicBiomedicines · 2025
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Cognitive Effects ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jaroslav FlegrDivision of Biology, Faculty of Science, Charles University in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic.
Rudolf HoffmannDepartment of Hematology, Na Homolce Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic.
Mike DammannDivision of Biology, Faculty of Science, Charles University in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic.
Charles University · CZNa Homolce Hospital · CZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rhesus-positive and Rhesus-negative persons differ in the presence-absence of highly immunogenic RhD protein on the erythrocyte membrane. The biological function of the RhD molecule is unknown. Its structure suggests that the molecular complex with RhD protein transports NH3 or CO2 molecules across the erythrocyte cell membrane. Some data indicate that RhD positive and RhD negative subjects differ in their tolerance to certain biological factors, including, Toxoplasma infection, aging and fatique. Present cross sectional study performed on 3,130 subjects) showed that Rhesus negative subjects differed in many indices of their health status, including incidences of many disorders. Rhesus negative subjects reported to have more frequent allergic, digestive, heart, hematological, immunity, mental health, and neurological problems. On the population level, a Rhesus-negativity-associated burden could be compensated for, for example, by the heterozygote advantage, but for Rhesus negative subjects this burden represents a serious problem.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAge DistributionChildCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseHealth StatusHumansIncidenceMaleMiddle AgedPolymorphism, GeneticRh-Hr Blood-Group SystemRh-Hr Blood-Group System

Identifiers

PMID26495842
PMCPMC4619848
OpenAlexW2179299871

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.