CrossTalk opposing view: The mouse SuHx model is not a good model of pulmonary arterial hypertension.

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.

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.

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Sry-modified laboratory rat lines to study sex-chromosome effects underlying sex differences in physiology and disease: Four Core Genotypes and more.Biology of sex differences · 2026
   Article
2. Pneumonectomy combined with SU5416 or monocrotaline pyrrole does not cause severe pulmonary hypertension in mice.American journal of physiology. Lung cellular and molecular physiology · 2024
   Article
3. Cannabidiol Improves Antioxidant Capacity and Reduces Inflammation in the Lungs of Rats with Monocrotaline-Induced Pulmonary Hypertension.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
   Article
4. Overview: pulmonary vascular function in health and disease.The Journal of physiology · 2019
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Commented on by
  Rebuttal from Krishna C. Penumatsa, Rod R. Warburton, Nicholas S. Hill and Barry L. Fanburg.2019

Authors and funding

1 author.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as