ArticleNew space2021
Earth-Based Research Analogs to Investigate Space-Based Health Risks.
Article in New space, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrative focus on the space exposome-integrome: physiological challenges and practical limits of countermeasures beyond low Earth orbit.NPJ microgravity · 2025Review
- Initiating Sensory Science Research in Space Conditions-Current Practices and Future Perspectives.Comprehensive reviews in food science and food safety · 2025Review
- Environmental study and stress-related biomarkers modifications in a crew during analog astronaut mission EMMPOL 6.European journal of applied physiology · 2025Article
- Space exploration and lifestyle medicine: a narrative review of its implications for astronaut health and remote Earth-based environments.Frontiers in physiology · 2025Review
- Peripheral skin cooling during gravitational challenges in parabolic flight - experimental protocol, implementation, and case study of the CoolFly experiment.Frontiers in physiology · 2025Article
- Short-term and long-term phenotypic stability of actigraphic sleep metrics involving repeated sleep loss and recovery.Journal of sleep research · 2024Article
- Review
- Article
- Social Isolation: A Narrative Review on the Dangerous Liaison between the Autonomic Nervous System and Inflammation.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Cardiovascular measures display robust phenotypic stability across long-duration intervals involving repeated sleep deprivation and recovery.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Article
- Left Ventricular Ejection Time Measured by Echocardiography Differentiates Neurobehavioral Resilience and Vulnerability to Sleep Loss and Stress.Frontiers in physiology · 2021Article
- Cortisol and C-Reactive Protein Vary During Sleep Loss and Recovery but Are Not Markers of Neurobehavioral Resilience.Frontiers in physiology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
During spaceflight, astronauts are exposed to a variety of unique hazards, including altered gravity fields, long periods of isolation and confinement, living in a closed environment at increasing distances from Earth, and exposure to higher levels of hazardous ionizing radiation. Preserving human health and performance in the face of these relentless hazards becomes progressively more difficult as missions increase in length and extend beyond low Earth orbit. Finding solutions is a significant challenge that is further complicated by logistical issues associated with studying these unique hazards. Although research studies using space-based platforms are the gold standard, these are not without limitations. Factors such as the small sample size of the available astronaut crew, high expense, and time constraints all add to the logistical challenge. To overcome these limitations, a wide variety of Earth-based analogs, from polar research outposts to an undersea laboratory, are available to augment space-based studies. Each analog simulates unique physiological and behavioral effects associated with spaceflight and, therefore, for any given study, the choice of an appropriate platform is closely linked to the phenomena under investigation as well as the characteristics of the analog. There are pros and cons to each type of analog and each actual facility, but overall they provide a reasonable means to overcome the barriers associated with conducting experimental research in space. Analogs, by definition, will never be perfect, but they are a useful component of an integrated effort to understand the human risks of living and working in space. They are a necessary resource for pushing the frontier of human spaceflight, both for astronauts and for commercial space activities. In this review, we describe the use of analogs here on Earth to replicate specific aspects of the spaceflight environment and highlight how analog studies support future human endeavors in space.
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.