ArticlePloS one2017
A comparative study of the characterization of miR-155 in knockout mice.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Post-transcriptional regulation of erythropoiesis.Blood science (Baltimore, Md.) · 2023Review
- Article
- Characterization of a Murine Model System to Study MicroRNA-147 During Inflammatory Organ Injury.Inflammation · 2021Article
- Modulating inflammation through the negative regulation of NF-κB signaling.Journal of leukocyte biology · 2018Review
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
miR-155 is one of the most important miRNAs and plays a very important role in numerous biological processes. However, few studies have characterized this miRNA in mice under normal physiological conditions. We aimed to characterize miR-155 in vivo by using a comparative analysis. In our study, we compared miR-155 knockout (KO) mice with C57BL/6 wild type (WT) mice in order to characterize miR-155 in mice under normal physiological conditions using many evaluation methods, including a reproductive performance analysis, growth curve, ultrasonic estimation, haematological examination, and histopathological analysis. These analyses showed no significant differences between groups in the main evaluation indices. The growth and development were nearly normal for all mice and did not differ between the control and model groups. Using a comparative analysis and a summary of related studies published in recent years, we found that miR-155 was not essential for normal physiological processes in 8-week-old mice. miR-155 deficiency did not affect the development and growth of naturally ageing mice during the 42 days after birth. Thus, studying the complex biological functions of miR-155 requires the further use of KO mouse models.
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.