Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28654668›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Influence of the way of reporting alpha-Amylase values in saliva in different naturalistic situations: A pilot study.

María Dolores Contreras-Aguilar, Damián Escribano, Silvia Martínez-Subiela, Silvia Martínez-Miró, Mónica Rubio, Asta Tvarijonaviciute, Fernando Tecles, Jose J Cerón

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 31 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Welfare Assessment in Pigs Using the Salivary Proteome.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Salivary Ferritin Changes in Patients with COVID-19.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Salivary biomarkers in breast cancer: a cross-sectional study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021
    Article
  20. Article
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

8 authors.

María Dolores Contreras-AguilarClinic Analysis Interdisciplinary Laboratory (Interlab-UMU), Campus of Excellence Mare Nostrum, Murcia, Spain.
Damián EscribanoClinic Analysis Interdisciplinary Laboratory (Interlab-UMU), Campus of Excellence Mare Nostrum, Murcia, Spain.
Silvia Martínez-SubielaClinic Analysis Interdisciplinary Laboratory (Interlab-UMU), Campus of Excellence Mare Nostrum, Murcia, Spain.
Silvia Martínez-MiróDepartament of Animal Production, Veterinary school, Campus of Excellence Mare Nostrum, Murcia Spain.
Mónica RubioDepartment of Medicine and Animal Surgey, Veterinary school, Universitat CEU Cardenal Herrera, Valencia, Spain.
Asta TvarijonaviciuteClinic Analysis Interdisciplinary Laboratory (Interlab-UMU), Campus of Excellence Mare Nostrum, Murcia, Spain.
Fernando TeclesClinic Analysis Interdisciplinary Laboratory (Interlab-UMU), Campus of Excellence Mare Nostrum, Murcia, Spain.
Jose J CerónClinic Analysis Interdisciplinary Laboratory (Interlab-UMU), Campus of Excellence Mare Nostrum, Murcia, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The objective of this pilot study was to compare the different ways of measuring salivary alpha-amylase (sAA, enzymatic vs. concentration) and to evaluate the influence that the different ways of reporting the results can have in sAA interpretation. For this purpose, sAA was measured by direct quantification and also by an enzymatic assay in three different naturalistic situations, a physical stressor (situation 1) and two mental stressors of different intensity (situations 2 and 3). The results were expressed in three different ways (without correction, multiplied by flow rate and divided by protein concentration). sAA concentration and activity increased just after situations 1 and 3. When values were multiplied by the flow rate, significant changes after situation 1 were detected only for sAA activity but not for sAA concentration, being these changes of lower significance and magnitude that those observed for sAA activity without any correction. In addition, a significant increase in sAA activity was found at T+15 in situation 2. In situation 3 the significant decrease in sAA at T+15 disappeared. When values were divided by protein concentration, there were no significant changes in situations 1 or 3, but a decrease in situation 2 at T+0 and an increase at T+15. sAA activity and concentration showed a significant correlation in all situations. This pilot study points out that the way of expressing sAA can influence the results obtained in different stress models and also their interpretation. Therefore, how sAA is reported and the factors involved in the different ways of expressing sAA, should be taken into consideration for an objective interpretation of sAA values.

Indexed as

AdolescentEnzyme AssaysFemaleFluoroimmunoassayHumansMalePilot ProjectsResearch DesignSalivary alpha-AmylasesStress, PhysiologicalStress, PsychologicalYoung AdultSalivary alpha-Amylases

Identifiers

PMID28654668
PMCPMC5487069

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.