Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30294323›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in immunology2018

Going to Bat(s) for Studies of Disease Tolerance.

Judith N Mandl, Caitlin Schneider, David S Schneider, Michelle L Baker

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in immunology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 61 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
61citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
7.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

61 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 105 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. A metaanalysis of bat phylogenetics and positive selection based on genomes and transcriptomes from 18 species.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2019
    Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Extensive longevity and DNA virus-driven adaptation in nearcticbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Presence ofViruses · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

1 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 at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Judith N MandlDepartment of Physiology, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Caitlin SchneiderDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
David S SchneiderDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States.
Michelle L BakerAustralian Animal Health Laboratory, Health and Biosecurity Business Unit, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Geelong, VIC, Australia.
McGill University · CACommonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation · AUStanford University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A majority of viruses that have caused recent epidemics with high lethality rates in people, are zoonoses originating from wildlife. Among them are filoviruses (e.g., Marburg, Ebola), coronaviruses (e.g., SARS, MERS), henipaviruses (e.g., Hendra, Nipah) which share the common features that they are all RNA viruses, and that a dysregulated immune response is an important contributor to the tissue damage and hence pathogenicity that results from infection in humans. Intriguingly, these viruses also all originate from bat reservoirs. Bats have been shown to have a greater mean viral richness than predicted by their phylogenetic distance from humans, their geographic range, or their presence in urban areas, suggesting other traits must explain why bats harbor a greater number of zoonotic viruses than other mammals. Bats are highly unusual among mammals in other ways as well. Not only are they the only mammals capable of powered flight, they have extraordinarily long life spans, with little detectable increases in mortality or senescence until high ages. Their physiology likely impacted their history of pathogen exposure and necessitated adaptations that may have also affected immune signaling pathways. Do our life history traits make us susceptible to generating damaging immune responses to RNA viruses or does the physiology of bats make them particularly tolerant or resistant? Understanding what immune mechanisms enable bats to coexist with RNA viruses may provide critical fundamental insights into how to achieve greater resilience in humans.

Indexed as

AnimalsChiropteraDisease ReservoirsDisease ResistanceHost-Pathogen InteractionsHumansRNA VirusesRNA Virus InfectionsZoonosesbats (Chiroptera)comparative genome analysesdisease tolerancehost pathogen interactioninnate immunityviral immunology

Identifiers

PMID30294323
PMCPMC6158362
OpenAlexW2890126170

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.