ReviewAdvances in experimental medicine and biology2022
Use of Agriculturally Important Animals as Models in Biomedical Research.
Review in Advances in experimental medicine and biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Gestational Obesity Impairs Maternal Glucose Metabolism in Post-Partum Ewes.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
- Review: Nutritional regulation of muscle growth in neonatal swine.Animal : an international journal of animal bioscience · 2023Review
- Dietary supplementation with L-citrulline improves placental angiogenesis and embryonic survival in gilts.Experimental biology and medicine (Maywood, N.J.) · 2023Article
- Obesity and Metabolic Traits after High-Fat Diet in Iberian Pigs with Low Birth Weight of Placental Origin.Biology · 2022Article
- The "ideal protein" concept is not ideal in animal nutrition.Experimental biology and medicine (Maywood, N.J.) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Livestock have contributed significantly to advances in biomedicine and offer unique advantages over rodent models. The human is the ideal biomedical model; however, ethical reasons limit the testing of hypotheses and treatments in humans. Rodent models are frequently used as alternatives to humans due to size, low cost, and ease of genetic manipulation, and have contributed tremendously to our understanding of human health and disease. However, the use of rodents in translational research pose challenges for researchers due to physiological differences to humans. The use of livestock species as biomedical models can address these challenges as livestock have several similarities to human anatomy, physiology, genetics, and metabolism and their larger size permits collection of more frequent and often larger samples. Additionally, recent advances in genetics in livestock species allow for studies in genomics, proteomics, and metabolomics, which have the added benefit of applications to both humans in biomedical research and livestock in improving production. In this review, we provide an overview of scientific findings using livestock and benefits of each model to the livestock industry and to biomedical research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34807449What 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.