Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38285336›Full record

ReviewMethods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.)2024

The Future of the Teratogenicity Testing.

Muhsin Aydin, Banu Guven Ezer, Eyyup Rencuzogullari

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Muhsin AydinDepartment of Biology, Science and Letters Faculty, Adiyaman University, Adiyaman, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0002-1204-1163
Banu Guven EzerDepartment of Biology, Institute of Graduate Education, Adiyaman University, Adiyaman, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0003-3291-5507
Eyyup RencuzogullariDepartment of Biology, Science and Letters Faculty, Adiyaman University, Adiyaman, Turkey. erencuzogullari@adiyaman.edu.tr.ORCID 0000-0001-5206-6421

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of this review is to examine the importance, possible advantages and disadvantages of teratogenicity tests, and their future. For this purpose, numerous sources have been scanned in the field of teratogenicity. Although there are many methods related to teratogenic studies and very important studies have been made in this field, there are still serious deficiencies. There are advantages and disadvantages of in vitro and in vivo classical tests that have been used so far. The current status of in vivo tests is a matter of debate, especially due to the use of experimental animals. However, in vitro tests that do not perform the distribution and metabolism of chemicals also raise doubts in determination of teratogenicity. Despite the modern approaches of molecular biology and genetics and the best diagnostic techniques, the real cause of more than half of congenital diseases is still not understood. In this sense, the importance and necessity of teratogenic tests are understood once again. It is necessary to develop faster, reliable, and inexpensive techniques to replace traditional in vivo tests. It is important to disseminate harmless and reliable imaging techniques such as micro-CT. The use of European Center for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM) scientifically validated and approved in vitro tests such as embryonic stem cell test (EST), micro mass test (MM), and whole embryo culture (WEC) tests in routine screening can provide a solution in a shorter time than the classical tests. Improving these tests and developing new tests can help to solve the problem permanently.

Indexed as

TeratogenesisAnimalsBiological AssayEmbryo, MammalianEmbryonic Stem CellsTeratogensTeratogensFuture of teratologyTeratogenicity testsTeratology

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.