ReviewTrends in molecular medicine2024
Nontraditional models as research tools: the road not taken.
Review in Trends in molecular medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Historical reasons resulted in the almost exclusive use of a few species, most prominently Mus musculus, as the mainstream models in biomedical research. This selection was not based on Mus's distinctive relevance to human disease but rather to the pre-existing availability of resources and tools for the species that were used as models, which has enabled their adoption for research in health sciences. Unless the utilization and range of nontraditional research models expand considerably, progress in biomedical research will remain restricted within the trajectory that has been set by the existing models and their ability to provide clinically relevant information.
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.