ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2022
Respiratory response to finger clamping in dogs under general anesthesia: A descriptive pilot study.
Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim of the study: The aim of this study was to assess the effects of a nociceptive stimulus on respiratory variables in anesthetized dogs. Material and method: Eleven dogs received acepromazine administered intramuscularly (IM) at a dose of 0.04 mg kg Result: The results showed a large variation in the individual values of Drive and Timing and are presented in a descriptive manner. The observation of Drive values over time showed variations following nociceptive stimuli. Drive appears to have increased only for those dogs that did not move during the stimulus, and were therefore pinched for a full 60 s. In contrast, the study of the Timing values revealed no difference between the data before and after nociceptive stimulation. However Timing seems to increase after morphine administration. Conclusion: Drive remains a parameter that needs to be studied in depth to determine its sensitivity and precocity to monitor acute nociception.
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.