Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26513508›Full record

ReviewCritical reviews in toxicology2016

A critical review of neonicotinoid insecticides for developmental neurotoxicity.

Larry P Sheets, Abby A Li, Daniel J Minnema, Richard H Collier, Moire R Creek, Richard C Peffer

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Critical reviews in toxicology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
11.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

44 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 146 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Risk Factors for Brain Health in Agricultural Work: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. 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
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Larry P Sheetsa Bayer CropScience , Research Triangle Park , NC , USA ;
Abby A Lib Exponent Health Sciences , San Francisco , CA , USA ;
Daniel J Minnemac Syngenta Crop Protection , Greensboro , NC , USA ;
Richard H Collierd Landis International , Valdosta, GA , USA ;
Moire R Creeke Valent USA Corporation , Walnut Creek , CA , USA.
Richard C Pefferc Syngenta Crop Protection , Greensboro , NC , USA ;
Syngenta (United States) · USExponent (United States) · USLandis International (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A comprehensive review of published and previously unpublished studies was performed to evaluate the neonicotinoid insecticides for evidence of developmental neurotoxicity (DNT). These insecticides have favorable safety profiles, due to their preferential affinity for nicotinic receptor (nAChR) subtypes in insects, poor penetration of the mammalian blood-brain barrier, and low application rates. Nevertheless, examination of this issue is warranted, due to their insecticidal mode of action and potential exposure with agricultural and residential uses. This review identified in vitro, in vivo, and epidemiology studies in the literature and studies performed in rats in accordance with GLP standards and EPA guidelines with imidacloprid, acetamiprid, thiacloprid, clothianidin, thiamethoxam, and dinotefuran, which are all the neonicotinoids currently registered in major markets. For the guideline-based studies, treatment was administered via the diet or gavage to primiparous female rats at three dose levels, plus a vehicle control (≥20/dose level), from gestation day 0 or 6 to lactation day 21. F1 males and females were evaluated using measures of motor activity, acoustic startle response, cognition, brain morphometry, and neuropathology. The principal effects in F1 animals were associated with decreased body weight (delayed sexual maturation, decreased brain weight, and morphometric measurements) and acute toxicity (decreased activity during exposure) at high doses, without neuropathology or impaired cognition. No common effects were identified among the neonicotinoids that were consistent with DNT or the neurodevelopmental effects associated with nicotine. Findings at high doses were associated with evidence of systemic toxicity, which indicates that these insecticides do not selectively affect the developing nervous system.

Indexed as

AnimalsCentral Nervous SystemDisease Models, AnimalDose-Response Relationship, DrugGuanidineGuanidinesHumansImidazolesInsectaInsecticidesNeonicotinoidsNitro CompoundsOxazinesPyridinesRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicReceptors, NicotinicacetamipridclothianidindinotefuranGuanidineGuanidinesimidaclopridImidazolesInsecticidesneonicotinoid nitroguanidineNeonicotinoidsNitro CompoundsOxazinesPyridinesReceptors, NicotinicthiaclopridThiamethoxamThiazinesThiazolesacetamipridclothianidindevelopmental neurotoxicityimidaclopridinsecticideNeonicotinoidnicotinic receptorthiamethoxam

Identifiers

PMID26513508
PMCPMC4732412
OpenAlexW1842247088

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.