Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36171094›Full record

ReviewThe Journal of reproduction and development2022

NAD

Charley-Lea Pollard, Zamira Gibb, Aleona Swegen, Christopher G Grupen

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Journal of reproduction and development, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Mitochondrial DNA Damage and Its Repair Mechanisms in Aging Oocytes.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Review
  8. Article
  9. A Molecular Perspective and Role of NADInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Review
  10. Can Nicotinamide Adenine Dinucleotide (NADAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Differential responses to maternal diabetes in embryo and visceral yolk sac.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2023
    Article
  13. Review
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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Charley-Lea PollardSydney School of Veterinary Science, Faculty of Science, The University of Sydney, NSW, 2570, Australia.
Zamira GibbPriority Research Centre for Reproductive Science, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, 2308, Australia.
Aleona SwegenPriority Research Centre for Reproductive Science, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, 2308, Australia.
Christopher G GrupenSydney School of Veterinary Science, Faculty of Science, The University of Sydney, NSW, 2570, Australia.
University of Newcastle Australia · AUUniversity of Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Oocyte quality is the limiting factor in female fertility. It is well known that maternal nutrition plays a role in reproductive function, and manipulating nutrition to improve fertility in livestock has been common practice in the past, particularly with respect to negative energy balance in cattle. A deficiency in nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NAD

Indexed as

SirtuinsAnimalsCattleEnergy MetabolismFemaleHumansMiceNADOocytesPoly(ADP-ribose) PolymerasesNADPoly(ADP-ribose) PolymerasesSirtuinsFertilityNicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NAD+)Oocyte qualitypoly-ADP-ribose polymerases (PARPs)Sirtuins

Identifiers

PMID36171094
PMCPMC9792654
OpenAlexW4297101926

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.