ArticleSaudi journal of biological sciences2021
A novel model of early type 1 diabetes mellitus: The chick embryo air sack model.
Article in Saudi journal of biological sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative analysis of morphological atlas at different HH stages of embryonic development for SPF ducks and SPF chickens.Poultry science · 2026Article
- Baicalin administration could rescue high glucose-induced craniofacial skeleton malformation by regulating neural crest development.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Diabetes Mellitus (DM) is a metabolic disease characterized by hyperglycemia. Chronic hyperglycemia is associated with long-term dysfunction such as retinopathy, nephropathy, neuropathy and cardiovascular diseases. These complications increase rates of death and disability worldwide. Due to the negative effects of DM on the quality of life, the mechanism and treatments of the disease should be investigated in more detail. Most of the research in diabetes is performed in experimental animals. Experimental animal models contributed to the advancement of clinical research, the development of new therapeutic approaches, the discovery of insulin and the purification of insulin. There are many animal models of DM in the literature. But there are a few DM model studies created with chick embryos. In these studies, it was seen that there were differences in STZ doses and STZ administration techniques. The objective of this study was to create a more acceptable and easier DM model. 180 specific pathogen free (SPF) fertilized chicken eggs (White Leghorn chicken) were used in this study. STZ was administered to 160 SPF eggs for an induced DM model. The remaining 20 SPF eggs were separated as a control group. We used two different DM models (Air sack model (ASM) and Chorioallantoic membrane model (CAMM)) and blood sampling technique in our study. 160 SPF eggs were divided into two groups with 80 eggs in each group, according to the model in which STZ was administered. When the relationship between blood glucose and blood insulin levels were examined, it was determined that there was a significantly strong negative correlation in the control group and ASM 1 group; and a significantly very strong negative correlation was found in the ASM 2 group and ASM 3 group. Our data indicate that the optimal STZ dose to create a DM model was 0.45 mg/egg and the best DM model was ASM. The second technique to be the best blood sampling technique for determining blood glucose levels. We believe that ASM can be used in DM studies and anti-DM drug studies in terms of its easebly, applicability, reproducibility and low cost.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.