Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36429620›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022

Fetal Development in Anatomical Preparations of Ruysch and the Meckels in Comparison.

Oxana Kosenko, Claudia Steinicke, Heike Kielstein, Florian Steger

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Oxana KosenkoInstitute of the History, Philosophy and Ethics of Medicine at Ulm University, Parkstraße 11, 89073 Ulm, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-4859-826X
Claudia SteinickeInstitute of Anatomy and Cell Biology, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Große Steinstraße 52, 06108 Halle, Germany.
Heike KielsteinInstitute of Anatomy and Cell Biology, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Große Steinstraße 52, 06108 Halle, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-8866-3543
Florian StegerInstitute of the History, Philosophy and Ethics of Medicine at Ulm University, Parkstraße 11, 89073 Ulm, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-8108-1591

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Anatomical collections have been used for centuries for research and teaching purposes. By the example of selected preparations of fetal development from the Ruysch collection (17th-18th centuries) and the Meckel collections (18th-19th century), this article aims to trace the changing purposes, specifics and methods of creating specimens as well as the development of anatomy during that period. The selected specimens are compared and analyzed implementing the historical-critical method. Regarding the appearance of the preparations, we see a transition from the visually aesthetic specimens (Ruysch) to exact ones (Meckel collections). If Ruysch's preparations were compared in his time to works of art, specimens created by three anatomists of the Meckel dynasty were primarily created for teaching and research purposes. However, Ruysch's preparations tracing fetal circulation were scientific discoveries of the time. As for preparations of fetal development from the Meckel collections, we see both specimens of physiological processes already known at that time and experimental ones. Regarding teratology, Ruysch and Meckel the Younger tried to explain malformations, but their anatomical preparations could hardly give answers to the cause of deviations from the norm. The differences between the collections can be explained by the different stages of development of anatomy of the time and by the research interests of the anatomists themselves.

Indexed as

Fetal DevelopmentResearch DesignEstheticsanatomical collectionanatomical specimenfetal developmenthistory of anatomyteratology

Identifiers

PMID36429620
PMCPMC9690589

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.