Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26561503›Full record

ReviewGut pathogens2015

Animal models to study acute and chronic intestinal inflammation in mammals.

Janelle A Jiminez, Trina C Uwiera, G Douglas Inglis, Richard R E Uwiera

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Gut pathogens, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 96 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
96citing papers in PubMed
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

96 citing papers in PubMed, 203 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Microorganisms · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Ion transport and epithelial barrier dysfunction in experimental models of ulcerative colitis.American journal of physiology. Gastrointestinal and liver physiology · 2025
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

36 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Janelle A JiminezAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada Research Centre, Lethbridge, AB Canada ; Department of Agricultural, Food and Nutritional Science, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB Canada.
Trina C UwieraDepartment of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB Canada.
G Douglas InglisAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada Research Centre, Lethbridge, AB Canada.
Richard R E UwieraDepartment of Agricultural, Food and Nutritional Science, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB Canada.
University of Alberta · CAAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Acute and chronic inflammatory diseases of the intestine impart a significant and negative impact on the health and well-being of human and non-human mammalian animals. Understanding the underlying mechanisms of inflammatory disease is mandatory to develop effective treatment and prevention strategies. As inflammatory disease etiologies are multifactorial, the use of appropriate animal models and associated metrics of disease are essential. In this regard, animal models used alone or in combination to study acute and chronic inflammatory disease of the mammalian intestine paired with commonly used inflammation-inducing agents are reviewed. This includes both chemical and biological incitants of inflammation, and both non-mammalian (i.e. nematodes, insects, and fish) and mammalian (i.e. rodents, rabbits, pigs, ruminants, dogs, and non-human primates) models of intestinal inflammation including germ-free, gnotobiotic, as well as surgical, and genetically modified animals. Importantly, chemical and biological incitants induce inflammation via a multitude of mechanisms, and intestinal inflammation and injury can vary greatly according to the incitant and animal model used, allowing studies to ascertain both long-term and short-term effects of inflammation. Thus, researchers and clinicians should be aware of the relative strengths and limitations of the various animal models used to study acute and chronic inflammatory diseases of the mammalian intestine, and the scope and relevance of outcomes achievable based on this knowledge. The ability to induce inflammation to mimic common human diseases is an important factor of a successful animal model, however other mechanisms of disease such as the amount of infective agent to induce disease, invasion mechanisms, and the effect various physiologic changes can have on inducing damage are also important features. In many cases, the use of multiple animal models in combination with both chemical and biological incitants is necessary to answer the specific question being addressed regarding intestinal disease. Some incitants can induce acute responses in certain animal models while others can be used to induce chronic responses; this review aims to illustrate the strengths and weaknesses in each animal model and to guide the choice of an appropriate acute or chronic incitant to facilitate intestinal disease.

Indexed as

AcuteAnimal modelsBiologicalChemicalChronicIncitantsInflammationIntestine

Identifiers

PMID26561503
PMCPMC4641401
OpenAlexW2219964339

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.