Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29291052›Full record

ArticleRoyal Society open science2017

Secondary osteons scale allometrically in mammalian humerus and femur.

A A Felder, C Phillips, H Cornish, M Cooke, J R Hutchinson, M Doube

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Royal Society open science, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. An overview of de novo bone generation in animal models.Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society · 2021
    Review
  16. Cortical Bone Porosity in Rabbit Models of Osteoporosis.Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research · 2020
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

6 authors.

A A FelderSkeletal Biology Group, Comparative Biomedical Sciences, The Royal Veterinary College, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3510-9906
C PhillipsMuseums and Archives, The Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, UK.
H CornishMuseums and Archives, The Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, UK.
M CookeMuseums and Archives, The Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, UK.
J R HutchinsonStructure and Motion Laboratory, Comparative Biomedical Sciences, The Royal Veterinary College, London, UK.
M DoubeSkeletal Biology Group, Comparative Biomedical Sciences, The Royal Veterinary College, London, UK.

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/F000863/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Intra-cortical bone remodelling is a cell-driven process that replaces existing bone tissue with new bone tissue in the bone cortex, leaving behind histological features called secondary osteons. While the scaling of bone dimensions on a macroscopic scale is well known, less is known about how the spatial dimensions of secondary osteons vary in relation to the adult body size of the species. We measured the cross-sectional area of individual intact secondary osteons and their central Haversian canals in transverse sections from 40 stylopodal bones of 39 mammalian species (body mass 0.3-21 000 kg). Scaling analysis of our data shows that mean osteonal resorption area (negative allometry, exponent 0.23,

Indexed as

adult body masshistomorphometryintra-cortical bone remodellingphylogenetic correctionsecondary osteons

Identifiers

PMID29291052
PMCPMC5717626

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.