ReviewFrontiers in physiology2026
How should we teach homeostasis? Filling the gaps and envisioning the future.
Review in Frontiers in physiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This article provides a conceptual and pedagogical analysis aimed at advancing homeostasis education within integrative physiology. Although homeostasis was originally formulated to describe the stability of the internal environment (IE), educators have traditionally emphasized the regulation of individual parameters such as body temperature, blood glucose, and blood pressure. This emphasis reflects historical methodological limitations rather than the full conceptual scope intended by Claude Bernard and Walter Cannon. Building on conceptual developments articulated in Kuang (2023), the present analysis examines how homeostasis education can be refined and reoriented by clarifying several foundational conceptual distinctions. In particular, it addresses persistent gaps in current teaching, including common ambiguities related to the concepts of steady state, dynamic equilibrium, constancy, and stability and builds upon the distinction between parameter homeostasis and, IE homeostasis to strengthen its pedagogical and conceptual application. At the organism level, the article addresses how, IE homeostasis can be appropriately interpreted and taught, highlighting its emergent nature and the role of modern integrative measurements, including multi-omics approaches, in supporting a system-level understanding of homeostasis. Overall, the analysis supports the following central conclusions: (1) Parameter homeostasis refers to the relatively stable oscillation of the parameter value; (2) IE homeostasis constitutes a high-level emergent property of the organism; (4) modern integrative measurement approaches make it possible to study the IE as a whole, providing system-level readouts relevant to IE homeostasis; and (4) the conceptual scope of homeostasis or homeostatic tendency, is expanded in two directions: across health, subhealth, disease, and psychological steady states, and toward an explicit recognition of the constitutive role of organism-environment interactions in shaping internal stability. In sum, this article envisions an integrated direction for homeostasis education that moves beyond parameter-centric approaches and supports a coherent understanding of organismal regulation, adaptation, and resilience across diverse conditions.
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.