Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34270334›Full record

ArticleAnnual review of nutrition2021

Standardized Reference Diets for Zebrafish: Addressing Nutritional Control in Experimental Methodology.

Stephen A Watts, Louis R D'Abramo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annual review of nutrition, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

22 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. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

2 authors.

Stephen A WattsDepartment of Biology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama 35294-1170, USA; email: sawatts@uab.edu.
Louis R D'AbramoDepartment of Biology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama 35294-1170, USA; email: sawatts@uab.edu.

Funding

Why is the prevalence of obesity so high in U.S. Southern States? Regional predictors of BMI and obesity treatment response.P30DK056336 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI BARBARA A GOWER · 2000 to 2026
$31.9M
Development and Production of Standardized Reference Diets for Zebrafish ResearchR41MH119793 · NIMH · MERIDIAN BIOTECH, LLC · PI LAWRENCE, ADDISON, WATTS, STEPHEN ANDREW · 2018 to 2018
$341k
NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK056336NIMH NIH HHS R41 MH119793
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The ideal of experimental methodology in animal research is the reduction or elimination of environmental variables or consistency in their application. In lab animals, diet has been recognized as a very influential response variable. Reproducibility in research using rodents required the development of a unique diet of consistent ingredient and nutrient composition to allow for cross-comparisons of lab results, spatially and temporally. These diets are commonly referred to as standard reference diets (SRDs). The established validity of published nutritional requirements combined with the cooperation of commercial partners led to species-specific reference diets commonly used by the research community. During the last several decades, zebrafish (

Indexed as

Animal Nutritional Physiological PhenomenaZebrafishAnimalsDietHumansNutritional RequirementsReproducibility of Resultsingredientsnutrientsprocess of productionstandard reference diettestingzebrafish

Identifiers

PMID34270334
PMCPMC8582320

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.