Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29212578›Full record

ReviewComparative medicine2017

To Treat or Not to Treat: The Effects of Pain on Experimental Parameters.

Norman C Peterson, Elizabeth A Nunamaker, Patricia V Turner

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Comparative medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

46 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 86 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Ethical considerations regarding animal experimentation.Journal of preventive medicine and hygiene · 2022
    Review
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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Norman C PetersonVeterinary Sciences, MedImmune, Gaithersburg, Maryland;, Email: petersonn@medimmune.com.
Elizabeth A NunamakerAnimal Care Services, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.
Patricia V TurnerDepartment of Pathobiology, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada.
University of Florida · USUniversity of Guelph · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A common dilemma faced by all animal bioethics committees arises when exceptions are proposed to the use of analgesics in painful procedures. The committee and researcher must weigh the possible confounding effects of including additional drugs (analgesics) in their treatment regimen against the moral obligation to perform humane research. Often neglected in these considerations are the potential confounding effects of unrelieved pain and consistency with pain-relieving practices in human medicine. In this review, we summarize what is currently known regarding the molecular and physiologic effects of pain and analgesics in common animal models used across several therapeutic areas. This work is intended to help provide guidance and assurance that a comprehensive approach has been taken when contemplating how pain relief will be applied in animal research protocols.

Indexed as

Animal WelfareDisease Models, AnimalAnalgesicsAnimalsAnimals, LaboratoryBioethical IssuesPainPain ManagementAnalgesics

Identifiers

PMID29212578
PMCPMC5713161
OpenAlexW2980216578

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.