Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32138808›Full record

ReviewJournal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS2020

Review of Rodent Euthanasia Methods.

Nirah H Shomer, Krystal H Allen-Worthington, Debra L Hickman, Mahesh Jonnalagadda, Joseph T Newsome, Andrea R Slate, Helen Valentine, Angelina M Williams, Michele Wilkinson

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 57 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
57citing 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

57 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Molecular medicine reports · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. [Survey of Compliance With ARRIVE Guidelines in Medical Research Papers in Chinese].Sichuan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Sichuan University. Medical science edition · 2025
    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

9 authors.

Nirah H ShomerDivision of Comparative Medicine, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri;, Email: Nirah.Shomer@wustl.edu.
Krystal H Allen-WorthingtonNational Institutes of Health, NIMH, Bethesda, Maryland.
Debra L HickmanLaboratory Animal Resource Center, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana.
Mahesh JonnalagaddaLaboratory Animal Medical Services, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati Ohio.
Joseph T NewsomeDivision of Laboratory Animal Resources and Department of Pathology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Andrea R SlateCenter for Comparative Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Helen ValentineDivision of Animal Resources, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois.
Angelina M WilliamsNational Institutes of Health, NIMH, Bethesda, Maryland.
Michele WilkinsonNo Affiliation.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The optimal choice of euthanasia method for laboratory rodents depends on a number of factors, including the scientific goals of the study, the need to minimize animal pain and/or distress, applicable guidelines and laws, the training and proficiency of personnel, and the safety and emotional needs of the personnel performing the euthanasia. This manuscript aims to provide guidance to researchers so they may select the method of euthanasia that results in minimal experimental confounds, such as the creation of artifact and alteration of tissues and analytes. Specific situations addressed include euthanasia of large numbers of rodents and euthanasia of neonates. Recent literature supports the notion of significant strain-dependent differences in response to euthanasia methods such as CO₂ inhalation. To assist researchers in selecting a strain-appropriate method of euthanasia, the authors present a summary of methodologies for assessing the effectiveness of euthanasia techniques, including elements and parameters for a scoring rubric to assess them.

Indexed as

RodentiaAnimalsAnimals, LaboratoryAnimal WelfareCarbon DioxideEuthanasia, AnimalGuidelines as TopicCarbon Dioxide

Identifiers

PMID32138808
PMCPMC7210730

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.