Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28328880›Full record

ArticleLab animal2017

Swine models, genomic tools and services to enhance our understanding of human health and diseases.

Eric M Walters, Kevin D Wells, Elizabeth C Bryda, Susan Schommer, Randall S Prather

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Lab animal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 66 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
66citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

66 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Development of IVF Porcine Embryos in Microwell Culture System.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

6 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

5 authors.

Eric M WaltersNational Swine Resource and Research Center, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, USA.
Kevin D WellsNational Swine Resource and Research Center, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, USA.
Elizabeth C BrydaNational Swine Resource and Research Center, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, USA.
Susan SchommerNational Swine Resource and Research Center, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, USA.
Randall S PratherNational Swine Resource and Research Center, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, USA.

Funding

Resource Core for National Swine Resource and Research Center (NSRRC) Years 21-25U42OD011140 · OD · UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI-COLUMBIA · PI RANDALL S PRATHER · 2012 to 2026
$26.7M
NIH HHS U42 OD011140
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The pig is becoming increasingly important as a biomedical model. Given the similarities between pigs and humans, a greater understanding of the underlying biology of human health and diseases may come from the pig rather than from classical rodent models. With an increasing need for swine models, it is essential that the genomic tools, models and services be readily available to the scientific community. Many of these are available through the National Swine Resource and Research Center (NSRRC), a facility funded by the US National Institutes of Health at the University of Missouri. The goal of the NSRRC is to provide high-quality biomedical swine models to the scientific community.

Indexed as

Models, AnimalAnimalsAnimals, Genetically ModifiedCystic FibrosisDisease Models, AnimalNeoplasmsRetinitis PigmentosaSwine

Identifiers

PMID28328880
PMCPMC7091812

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.