Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29412829›Full record

ReviewPeptides2018

Problem or solution: The strange story of glucagon.

R V Scott, S R Bloom

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Peptides, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
4.2field-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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Proglucagon-Derived Peptides as Therapeutics.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2021
    Review
  17. Article
  18. A combined activation mechanism for the glucagon receptor.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2020
    Article
  19. Review
  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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

R V ScottImperial College London, 6th Floor, Commonwealth Building, Hammersmith Hospital, London, W12 0NN, United Kingdom. Electronic address: r.scott@imperial.ac.uk.
S R BloomImperial College London, 6th Floor, Commonwealth Building, Hammersmith Hospital, London, W12 0NN, United Kingdom. Electronic address: s.bloom@imperial.ac.uk.
Hammersmith Hospital · GBImperial College London · GB

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilMedical Research Council
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Globally, 13% of the world's adult population is obese, and more than 400 million people suffer from diabetes. These conditions are both associated with significant morbidity, mortality and financial cost. Therefore, finding new pharmacological treatments is an imperative. Relative hyperglucagonaemia is seen in all types of diabetes, and has been implicated in its pathogenesis. Consequently, clinical trials are underway using drugs which block glucagon activity to treat type 2 diabetes. Conversely, exogenous glucagon can increase energy expenditure. Therefore, researchers are designing peptides that combine activation of the glucagon receptor with further incretin properties, which will treat obesity while mitigating the hyperglycaemic effects of glucagon. This review will discuss these conflicting physiological properties of glucagon, and the attempts to harness these effects pharmacologically.

Indexed as

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2Energy MetabolismGlucagonHumansHyperglycemiaIncretinsInsulinObesityReceptors, GlucagonGlucagonIncretinsInsulinReceptors, GlucagonDiabetesEnergy expenditureGlucagonIncretinObesityOxyntomodulin

Identifiers

PMID29412829
PMCPMC5805853
OpenAlexW2791055036

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.