ArticlePloS one2019
Robust health-score based survival prediction for a neonatal mouse model of polymicrobial sepsis.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Depletion of Neonatal Neutrophilic Cells Worsens the Outcome of E. coli Sepsis in Newborn Mice.European journal of immunology · 2026Article
- Angiogenesis-associated pathways play critical roles in neonatal sepsis outcomes.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- The benefits, limitations and opportunities of preclinical models for neonatal drug development.Disease models & mechanisms · 2022Review
- Immunisation with the BCG and DTPw vaccines induces different programs of trained immunity in mice.Vaccine · 2022Article
- Modeling sepsis, with a special focus on large animal models of porcine peritonitis and bacteremia.Frontiers in physiology · 2022Review
- Hamsters as a Model of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2.Comparative medicine · 2021Review
- Robust alternative to the righting reflex to assess arousal in rodents.Scientific reports · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Infectious disease and sepsis represent a serious problem for all, but especially in early life. Much of the increase in morbidity and mortality due to infection in early life is presumed to relate to fundamental differences between neonatal and adult immunity. Mechanistic insight into the way newborns' immune systems handle infectious threats is lacking; as a result, there has only been limited success in providing effective immunomodulatory interventions to reduce infectious mortality. Given the complexity of the host-pathogen interactions, neonatal mouse models can offer potential avenues providing valuable data. However, the small size of neonatal mice hampers the ability to collect biological samples without sacrificing the animals. Further, the lack of a standardized metric to quantify newborn mouse health increases reliance on correlative biomarkers without a known relationship to 'clinical' outcome. To address this bottleneck, we developed a system that allows assessment of neonatal mouse health in a readily standardized and quantifiable manner. The resulting health scores require no special equipment or sample collection and can be assigned in less than 20 seconds. Importantly, the health scores are highly predictive of survival. A classifier built on our health score revealed a positive relationship between reduced bacterial load and survival, demonstrating how this scoring system can be used to bridge the gap between assumed relevance of biomarkers and the clinical outcome of interest. Adoption of this scoring system will not only provide a robust metric to assess health of newborn mice but will also allow for objective, prospective studies of infectious disease and possible interventions in early life.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.