ReviewCurrent osteoporosis reports2023
Zebrafish as a Model for Osteoporosis: Functional Validations of Genome-Wide Association Studies.
Review in Current osteoporosis reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Formononetin attenuates glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis via multiple osteoimmunological pathways: evidence from zebrafish and network pharmacology.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2026Article
- PHEWAS, TWAS, Mendelian Randomization in Osteoporosis Research: the good, the bad, and the ugly.Current osteoporosis reports · 2026Review
- Standardization of bone morphometry and mineral density assessments in zebrafish and other small laboratory fishes using X-ray radiography and micro-computed tomography.Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research · 2024Article
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 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewGWAS, as a largely correlational analysis, requires in vitro or in vivo validation. Zebrafish (Danio rerio) have many advantages for studying the genetics of human diseases. Since gene editing in zebrafish has been highly valuable for studying embryonic skeletal developmental processes that are prenatally or perinatally lethal in mammalian models, we are reviewing pros and cons of this model. RECENT
findingsThe true power for the use of zebrafish is the ease by which the genome can be edited, especially using the CRISPR/Cas9 system. Gene editing, followed by phenotyping, for complex traits such as BMD, is beneficial, but the major physiological differences between the fish and mammals must be considered. Like mammals, zebrafish do have main bone cells; thus, both in vivo stem cell analyses and in vivo imaging are doable. Yet, the "long" bones of fish are peculiar, and their bone cavities do not contain bone marrow. Partial duplication of the zebrafish genome should be taken into account. Overall, small fish toolkit can provide unmatched opportunities for genetic modifications and morphological investigation as a follow-up to human-first discovery.
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.