Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28381598›Full record

ReviewDisease models & mechanisms2017

Ingunn Holen, Valerie Speirs, Bethny Morrissey, Karen Blyth

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Disease models & mechanisms, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 117 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
117citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Frontiers in oncology · 2021
    Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Murine Models of Obesity-Related Cancer Risk.Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2025
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Exploring the CaToxicology research · 2025
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

57 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.

Ingunn HolenAcademic Unit of Clinical Oncology, University of Sheffield, Sheffield S10 2RX, UK.
Valerie SpeirsLeeds Institute of Cancer and Pathology, University of Leeds, Leeds LS9 7TF, UK.
Bethny MorrisseyLeeds Institute of Cancer and Pathology, University of Leeds, Leeds LS9 7TF, UK.
Karen BlythCancer Research UK Beatson Institute, Glasgow G61 1BD, UK K.Blyth@beatson.gla.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-9304-439X

Funding

Cancer Research UK C596/A17196National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research NC/L001004/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Research using animal model systems has been instrumental in delivering improved therapies for breast cancer, as well as in generating new insights into the mechanisms that underpin development of the disease. A large number of different models are now available, reflecting different types and stages of the disease; choosing which one to use depends on the specific research question(s) to be investigated. Based on presentations and discussions from leading experts who attended a recent workshop focused on

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchAnimalsBreast NeoplasmsDisease Models, AnimalDrug Resistance, NeoplasmFemaleGenetic EngineeringHumansMolecular Targeted TherapyBreast cancerCDXEurOPDXGEMMMouse modelsPDXSEARCHBreast

Identifiers

PMID28381598
PMCPMC5399571

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.