Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33001987›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Pesticides and transgenerational inheritance of pathologies: Designing, analysing and reporting rodent studies.

Ian Plewis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

1 author.

Ian PlewisSocial Statistics, School of Social Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-0053-497X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Single-centre studies examining the transgenerational inheritance of pathologies in rodents exposed to pesticides have not always taken important design and analysis issues into account. This paper examines these methodological and statistical issues in detail. Its particular focus is on the estimation of 'litter effects': the tendency for rodents within a litter to be more alike than rodents in different litters. Appropriate statistical models were fitted to published data from a series of widely reported studies carried out at Washington State University. These studies were amalgamated into a single dataset in order to estimate these litter effects and associated treatment effects. Litter effects varied by outcome and were often substantial. Consequently, the effective sample size was often substantially less than the number of observations with implications for the power of the studies. Moreover, the reported precision of the estimates of treatment effects was too low. These problems are exacerbated by unexplained missing data across generations. Researchers in the life sciences could be more cognisant of the guidelines established in medicine for reporting randomised controlled trials, particularly cluster randomised trials. More attention should be paid to the design and analysis of multi-generational rodent studies; their imperfections have important implications for assessments of the evidence relating to the risks of pesticides for public health.

Indexed as

HeredityModels, StatisticalRodentiaAnimalsAnimal StructuresHumansModels, AnimalPesticidesPublic HealthResearch DesignSample SizeWashingtonPesticides

Identifiers

PMID33001987
PMCPMC7529424

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.