Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32193395›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2020

Artificial microbiome heterogeneity spurs six practical action themes and examples to increase study power-driven reproducibility.

Abigail R Basson, Alexandria LaSalla, Gretchen Lam, Danielle Kulpins, Erika L Moen, Mark S Sundrud, Jun Miyoshi, Sanja Ilic, Betty R Theriault, Fabio Cominelli and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. The gut microbiome of laboratory mice: considerations and best practices for translational research.Mammalian genome : official journal of the International Mammalian Genome Society · 2021
    Review
  10. Taxonomic composition and variation in the gut microbiota of laboratory mice.Mammalian genome : official journal of the International Mammalian Genome Society · 2021
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. 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

11 authors.

Abigail R BassonDivision of Gastroenterology & Liver Diseases, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Alexandria LaSallaDivision of Gastroenterology & Liver Diseases, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Gretchen LamDivision of Gastroenterology & Liver Diseases, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Danielle KulpinsDivision of Gastroenterology & Liver Diseases, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Erika L MoenDepartment of Biomedical Data Science, Geisel School of Medicine, The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Lebanon, NH, USA.
Mark S SundrudDepartment of Immunology and Microbiology, The Scripps Research Institute, Jupiter, FL, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4249-0525
Jun MiyoshiDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Kyorin University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Sanja IlicDepartment of Human Sciences and Nutrition, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.
Betty R TheriaultDepartment of Surgery, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Fabio CominelliDivision of Gastroenterology & Liver Diseases, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Alexander Rodriguez-PalaciosDivision of Gastroenterology & Liver Diseases, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, USA. axr503@case.edu.

Funding

Translational Engineering in Cancer (TEC)P30CA023108 · NCI · DARTMOUTH COLLEGE · PI Fred W Kolling IV · 1985 to 2026
$91.3M
ULTRASTRUCTURE AND CYTOMORPHOLOGY COREP30DK042086 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO · PI CHANG, EUGENE B · 1990 to 2025
$29.8M
Ubiquitination Pathways Mediating Chronic Intestinal InflammationP01DK091222 · NIDDK · CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY · PI PIZARRO, THERESA TORRES · 2011 to 2020
$16.5M
The Cleveland Digestive Diseases Research Core Center (DDRCC)P30DK097948 · NIDDK · CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY · PI AMITABH CHAK · 2015 to 2026
$15.6M
MECHANISMS OF EXPERIMENTAL CROHNS DISEASER01DK055812 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA CHARLOTTESVILLE · PI COMINELLI, FABIO · 1999 to 2019
$4.9M
Combined Training Program in Digestive Disease SciencesT32DK083251 · NIDDK · CLEVELAND CLINIC LERNER COM-CWRU · PI COMINELLI, FABIO, FIOCCHI, CLAUDIO · 2010 to 2025
$3.6M
Bile acid-dependent T cell regulation in the intestineR01AI143821 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA · PI SUNDRUD, MARK SCOTT · 2019 to 2023
$2.2M
The Case Medical Student Summer Research Program (MSSRP)T35DK111373 · NIDDK · CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY · PI Fabio Cominelli, Theresa Torres Pizarro · 2016 to 2026
$718k
Identification of Pathogenic Bacteria in Crohn's DiseaseR21DK118373 · NIDDK · CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY · PI RODRIGUEZ-PALACIOS, ALEXANDER · 2018 to 2020
$601k
Functional characterization of human gut microbiota's response to diet in two gnotobiotic SAMP1/YitFc mouse models of Crohn's disease ileitisF32DK117585 · NIDDK · CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY · PI RAFFNER, ABIGAIL · 2018 to 2018
$64k
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA023108NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI143821NIDDK NIH HHS F32 DK117585NIDDK NIH HHS P01 DK091222NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK042086NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK097948NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK055812NIDDK NIH HHS R21 DK118373NIDDK NIH HHS T32 DK083251NIDDK NIH HHS T35 DK111373
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With >70,000 yearly publications using mouse data, mouse models represent the best engrained research system to address numerous biological questions across all fields of science. Concerns of poor study and microbiome reproducibility also abound in the literature. Despite the well-known, negative-effects of data clustering on interpretation and study power, it is unclear why scientists often house >4 mice/cage during experiments, instead of ≤2. We hypothesized that this high animal-cage-density  practice abounds in published literature because more mice/cage could be perceived as a strategy to reduce housing costs. Among other sources of 'artificial' confounding, including cyclical oscillations of the 'dirty-cage/excrement microbiome', we ranked by priority the heterogeneity of modern husbandry practices/perceptions across three professional organizations that we surveyed in the USA. Data integration (scoping-reviews, professional-surveys, expert-opinion, and 'implementability-score-statistics') identified Six-Actionable Recommendation Themes (SART) as a framework to re-launch emerging protocols and intuitive statistical strategies to use/increase study power. 'Cost-vs-science' discordance was a major aspect explaining heterogeneity, and scientists' reluctance to change. With a 'housing-density cost-calculator-simulator' and fully-annotated statistical examples/code, this themed-framework streamlines the rapid analysis of cage-clustered-data and promotes the use of 'study-power-statistics' to self-monitor the success/reproducibility of basic and translational research. Examples are provided to help scientists document analysis for study power-based sample size estimations using preclinical mouse data to support translational clinical trials, as requested in NIH/similar grants or publications.

Indexed as

Animal HusbandryAnimals, LaboratoryHousing, AnimalMiceMicrobiotaReproducibility of ResultsTranslational Research, BiomedicalAnimalsSample Size

Identifiers

PMID32193395
PMCPMC7081340

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.