Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41630758›Full record

ArticleOpen veterinary journal2025

Weam I Al-Noqair, Sawsan A Omer, Promy Virk, Osama B Mohammed

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Open veterinary journal, 2025. 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

4 authors.

Weam I Al-NoqairDepartment of Zoology, College of Science, King Saud University , Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Sawsan A OmerDepartment of Zoology, College of Science, King Saud University , Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Promy VirkDepartment of Zoology, College of Science, King Saud University , Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Osama B MohammedDepartment of Zoology, College of Science, King Saud University , Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Ethylene glycol is a colorless, odorless, sweet-tasting liquid commonly found as an industrial solvent. It is also used as an antifreeze in cooling and heating systems, hydraulic brake fluids, industrial humectants, and the paint and plastics industries, as well as an electrolytic condenser. Its sweet taste and odor make it particularly dangerous for accidental ingestion by children and pets, which may result in toxicity and death. Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the protective or ameliorative role of Methods: A total of 40 male Wistar rats were divided into 5 groups. The first group was kept as a control. The second and third groups were exposed to doses of 0.4% (v/v) and 0.75% (v/v) EG, respectively, for 28 days. Animals in groups IV and V, in addition to EG, were treated with 170 mg/kg/day of A. Results: There was an increase in the body weight of experimental animals on days 14 and 28 compared with the control group. On day 14, there was an increase in the Packed Corpuscular Volume and Red Blood Corpuscles values in animals exposed to EG, which was improved with the addition of A. Conclusion: Ethanolic extract of A.

Indexed as

Ethylene GlycolKidneyLiverPlant ExtractsPlant RootsAnimalsBiomarkersMaleRatsRats, WistarBiomarkersEthylene GlycolPlant ExtractsAlcea roseaEthylene GlycolHematologyKidney functionLiver functionToxicity

Identifiers

PMID41630758
PMCPMC12861469

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.