ReviewJournal of biomedical semantics2016
Reporting phenotypes in mouse models when considering body size as a potential confounder.
Review in Journal of biomedical semantics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rethinking ratio-based normalization towards model-based approaches in heart weight analysis.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- The rearing environment persistently modulates mouse phenotypes from the molecular to the behavioural level.PLoS biology · 2022Article
- Functional Aging in Male C57BL/6J Mice Across the Life-Span: A Systematic Behavioral Analysis of Motor, Emotional, and Memory Function to Define an Aging Phenotype.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2021Article
- A comprehensive and comparative phenotypic analysis of the collaborative founder strains identifies new and known phenotypes.Mammalian genome : official journal of the International Mammalian Genome Society · 2020Article
- The role of sex and body weight on the metabolic effects of high-fat diet in C57BL/6N mice.Nutrition & diabetes · 2017Article
- Thematic issue of the Second combined Bio-ontologies and Phenotypes Workshop.Journal of biomedical semantics · 2016Article
- Reporting phenotypes in mouse models when considering body size as a potential confounder.Journal of biomedical semantics · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Genotype-phenotype studies aim to identify causative relationships between genes and phenotypes. The International Mouse Phenotyping Consortium is a high throughput phenotyping program whose goal is to collect phenotype data for a knockout mouse strain of every protein coding gene. The scale of the project requires an automatic analysis pipeline to detect abnormal phenotypes, and disseminate the resulting gene-phenotype annotation data into public resources. A body weight phenotype is a common result of knockout studies. As body weight correlates with many other biological traits, this challenges the interpretation of related gene-phenotype associations. Co-correlation can lead to gene-phenotype associations that are potentially misleading. Here we use statistical modelling to account for body weight as a potential confounder to assess the impact. We find that there is a considerable impact on previously established gene-phenotype associations due to an increase in sensitivity as well as the confounding effect. We investigated the existing ontologies to represent this phenotypic information and we explored ways to ontologically represent the results of the influence of confounders on gene-phenotype associations. With the scale of data being disseminated within the high throughput programs and the range of downstream studies that utilise these data, it is critical to consider how we improve the quality of the disseminated data and provide a robust ontological representation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.