Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34256163›Full record

ReviewNeurotoxicology and teratology

Issues in the design, analysis, and application of rodent developmental neurotoxicology studies.

Charles V Vorhees, Michael T Williams

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Neurotoxicology and teratology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Effects of TBBPA Exposure on Neurodevelopment and Behavior in Mice.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Charles V VorheesDepartment of Pediatrics, College of Medicine, University of Cincinnati and Division of Pediatric Neurology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH 45229, United States of America. Electronic address: Charles.vorhees@cchmc.org.
Michael T WilliamsDepartment of Pediatrics, College of Medicine, University of Cincinnati and Division of Pediatric Neurology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH 45229, United States of America.
University of Cincinnati · US

Funding

REPRODUCTIVE AND DEVELOPMENTAL TOXICOLOGY RESEARCHP30ES006096 · NIEHS · UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI · PI PINNEY, SUSAN MENGEL · 1992 to 2022
$35.4M
Gene-pesticide interactions and ADHDR01ES032270 · NIEHS · CINCINNATI CHILDRENS HOSP MED CTR · PI VORHEES, CHARLES V, WILLIAMS, MICHAEL T · 2020 to 2024
$2.2M
NIEHS NIH HHS P30 ES006096NIEHS NIH HHS R01 ES032270
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Developmental neurotoxicity (DNT) studies could benefit from revisions to study design, data analysis, and some behavioral test methods to enhance reproducibility. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reviewed 69 studies submitted to the Office of Pesticide Programs. Two of the behavioral tests identified the lowest observable adverse effect level (LOAEL) 20 and 13 times, respectively, while the other two tests identified the LOAEL only 3 and 4 times, respectively. The EPA review showed that the functional observational battery (FOB) was least effective at detecting the LOAEL, whereas tests of learning and memory (L&M) had methodological shortcomings. Human neurodevelopmental toxicity studies over the past 30 years show that most of the adverse effects are on higher cognitive functions such as L&M. The results of human studies together with structure-function relationships from neuroscience, suggest that tests of working memory, spatial navigation/memory, and egocentric navigation/memory should be added to guideline studies. Collectively, the above suggest that EPA and EU DNT studies would better reflect human findings and be more relevant to children by aligning L&M tests to the same domains that are affected in children, removing less useful methods (FOB), and using newer statistical models to better account for random factors of litter and litter × sex. Common issues in study design and data analyses are discussed: sample size, random group assignment, blinding, elimination of subjective rating methods, avoiding confirmation bias, more complete reporting of species, housing, test protocols, age, test order, and litter effects. Litter in DNT studies should at least be included as a random factor in ANOVA models and may benefit from inclusion of litter × sex as random factors.

Indexed as

Toxicity TestsAnimalsCognitionHumansNeurotoxicity SyndromesResearch DesignSpatial MemorySpatial NavigationBlindingCincinnati water mazeEgocentric navigation/memoryLitter effectsMixed linear ANOVAMorris water mazeNeurocognitive effects in childrenRandom assignmentRandom factorsRandom litter × sex factorSpatial navigation/memoryWorking memory

Identifiers

PMID34256163
PMCPMC8440477
OpenAlexW3178939262

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.