Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37893225›Full record

ReviewBiomedicines2023

Animal Models in Diabetic Research-History, Presence, and Future Perspectives.

Shashank Pandey, Tomas Chmelir, Magdalena Chottova Dvorakova

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biomedicines, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Investigating the Wound Healing Potential of CuCOBiological trace element research · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. 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

3 authors.

Shashank PandeyBiomedical Center, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Charles University, 323 00 Pilsen, Czech Republic.
Tomas ChmelirDepartment of Physiology, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Charles University, 323 00 Pilsen, Czech Republic.ORCID 0009-0006-0707-9606
Magdalena Chottova DvorakovaBiomedical Center, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Charles University, 323 00 Pilsen, Czech Republic.ORCID 0000-0002-6078-1959

Funding

Charles University Cooperatio
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a very serious disease, the incidence of which has been increasing worldwide. The beginning of diabetic research can be traced back to the 17th century. Since then, animals have been experimented on for diabetic research. However, the greatest development of diabetes research occurred in the second half of the last century, along with the development of laboratory techniques. Information obtained by monitoring patients and animal models led to the finding that there are several types of DM that differ significantly from each other in the causes of the onset and course of the disease. Through different types of animal models, researchers have studied the pathophysiology of all types of diabetic conditions and discovered suitable methods for therapy. Interestingly, despite the unquestionable success in understanding DM through animal models, we did not fully succeed in transferring the data obtained from animal models to human clinical research. On the contrary, we have observed that the chances of drug failure in human clinical trials are very high. In this review, we will summarize the history and presence of animal models in the research of DM over the last hundred years. Furthermore, we have summarized the new methodological approaches, such as "organ-on-chip," that have the potential to screen the newly discovered drugs for human clinical trials and advance the level of knowledge about diabetes, as well as its therapy, towards a personalized approach.

Indexed as

animal modeldiabetes mellitushistoryorgan-on-chip

Identifiers

PMID37893225
PMCPMC10603837

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.