Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33898544›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in veterinary science2021

Best Practices for Microbiome Study Design in Companion Animal Research.

Jessica K Jarett, Dawn D Kingsbury, Katherine E Dahlhausen, Holly H Ganz

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Novel microbiotaFrontiers in microbiology · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Reply to Pantaleón García et al.American journal of physiology. Lung cellular and molecular physiology · 2022
    Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

4 authors.

Jessica K JarettAnimalBiome, Oakland, CA, United States.
Dawn D KingsburyAnimalBiome, Oakland, CA, United States.
Katherine E DahlhausenAnimalBiome, Oakland, CA, United States.
Holly H GanzAnimalBiome, Oakland, CA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The gut microbiome is a community of microorganisms that inhabits an animal host's gastrointestinal tract, with important effects on animal health that are shaped by multiple environmental, dietary, and host-associated factors. Clinical and dietary trials in companion animals are increasingly including assessment of the microbiome, but interpretation of these results is often hampered by suboptimal choices in study design. Here, we review best practices for conducting feeding trials or clinical trials that intend to study the effects of an intervention on the microbiota. Choices for experimental design, including a review of basic designs, controls, and comparison groups, are discussed in the context of special considerations necessary for microbiome studies. Diet is one of the strongest influences on the composition of gut microbiota, so applications specific to nutritional interventions are discussed in detail. Lastly, we provide specific advice for successful recruitment of colony animals and household pets into an intervention study. This review is intended to serve as a resource to academic and industry researchers, clinicians, and veterinarians alike, for studies that test many different types of interventions.

Indexed as

clinical trialsdiet trialsexperimental designfeeding trialsmicrobiome testingrecruitment

Identifiers

PMID33898544
PMCPMC8062777

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.