Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38671057›Full record

SynthesisScientific reports2024

A systematic review of animal and human data comparing the nasal potential difference test between cystic fibrosis and control.

Cathalijn H C Leenaars, Frans R Stafleu, Christine Häger, Hendrik Nieraad, André Bleich

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 27% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Cathalijn H C LeenaarsInstitute for Laboratory Animal Science, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany. Leenaars.Cathalijn@mh-hannover.de.
Frans R StafleuDepartment of Animals in Science and Society-Human-Animal Relationship, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Christine HägerInstitute for Laboratory Animal Science, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Hendrik NieraadInstitute for Laboratory Animal Science, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
André BleichInstitute for Laboratory Animal Science, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Medizinische Hochschule Hannover · DEUtrecht University · NL

Funding

Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung 01KC1904.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The nasal potential difference test (nPD) is an electrophysiological measurement which is altered in patients and animal models with cystic fibrosis (CF). Because protocols and outcomes vary substantially between laboratories, there are concerns over its validity and precision. We performed a systematic literature review (SR) of the nPD to answer the following review questions: A. Is the nasal potential difference similarly affected in CF patients and animal models?", and B. "Is the nPD in human patients and animal models of CF similarly affected by various changes in the experimental set-up?". The review protocol was preregistered on PROSPERO (CRD42021236047). We searched PubMed and Embase with comprehensive search strings. Two independent reviewers screened all references for inclusion and extracted all data. Included were studies about CF which described in vivo nPD measurements in separate CF and control groups. Risk of bias was assessed, and three meta-analyses were performed. We included 130 references describing nPD values for CF and control subjects, which confirmed substantial variation in the experimental design and nPD outcome between groups. The meta-analyses showed a clear difference in baseline nPD values between CF and control subjects, both in animals and in humans. However, baseline nPD values were, on average, lower in animal than in human studies. Reporting of experimental details was poor for both animal and human studies, and urgently needs to improve to ensure reproducibility of experiments within and between species.

Indexed as

Cystic FibrosisAnimalsDisease Models, AnimalHumansAnimal-to-human translationCystic fibrosisElectrophysiologyNasal potential differencePredictive valueReproducibility

Identifiers

PMID38671057
PMCPMC11053161
OpenAlexW4395660567

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.