Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37131044›Full record

ArticleAmbio2023

Lead concentrations in commercial dogfood containing pheasant in the UK.

Deborah J Pain, Rhys E Green, Nicola Bates, Maider Guiu, Mark A Taggart

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ambio, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
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

5 authors.

Deborah J PainDepartment of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge, CB2 3EJ, UK. pain.debbie@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8142-9017
Rhys E GreenDepartment of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge, CB2 3EJ, UK.
Nicola BatesVeterinary Poisons Information Service, 2nd Floor, Godfree Court, 29-35 Long Lane, London, SE1 4PL, UK.
Maider GuiuEnvironmental Research Institute, University of the Highlands and Islands, Castle Street, Thurso, KW14 7AP, UK.
Mark A TaggartEnvironmental Research Institute, University of the Highlands and Islands, Castle Street, Thurso, KW14 7AP, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

UK and EU regulators are evaluating the potential health benefits of restricting the use of lead ammunition. Little information is available on exposure of pets to ammunition-derived dietary lead from petfood containing meat from wild-shot game animals. We found dogfood including wild-shot pheasant meat to be widely available in the UK. 77% of samples from three raw pheasant dogfood products exceeded the EU maximum residue level (MRL) for lead in animal feed, with mean concentrations approximately 245, 135 and 49 times above the MRL. Concentrations > MRL were also found in a dried food containing pheasant, but not in a processed food, nor in chicken-based products. Lead concentrations in raw pheasant dogfood considerably exceeded those in pheasant meat sold for human consumption, possibly because the dogfood mincing process further fragmented lead particles from shot. Dogs frequently consuming such high-lead food risk adverse health effects; this should be considered within decision-making processes about regulation.

Indexed as

Food ContaminationLeadAnimalsAnimals, WildChickensDogsHumansMeatUnited KingdomLeadDogfoodLeadPheasantPoisoningShotUK

Identifiers

PMID37131044
PMCPMC10272007

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.