| Title |
Are animal models predictive for humans?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine, January 2009
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1747-5341-4-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Niall Shanks, Ray Greek, Jean Greek |
| Abstract |
It is one of the central aims of the philosophy of science to elucidate the meanings of scientific terms and also to think critically about their application. The focus of this essay is the scientific term predict and whether there is credible evidence that animal models, especially in toxicology and pathophysiology, can be used to predict human outcomes. Whether animals can be used to predict human response to drugs and other chemicals is apparently a contentious issue. However, when one empirically analyzes animal models using scientific tools they fall far short of being able to predict human responses. This is not surprising considering what we have learned from fields such evolutionary and developmental biology, gene regulation and expression, epigenetics, complexity theory, and comparative genomics. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 79 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 13 | 16% |
| United Kingdom | 10 | 13% |
| France | 4 | 5% |
| Italy | 3 | 4% |
| Australia | 2 | 3% |
| Canada | 2 | 3% |
| Turkey | 1 | 1% |
| Norway | 1 | 1% |
| Chile | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 4 | 5% |
| Unknown | 38 | 48% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 66 | 84% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 6% |
| Scientists | 5 | 6% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,035 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 5 | <1% |
| United States | 4 | <1% |
| Italy | 2 | <1% |
| South Africa | 2 | <1% |
| Spain | 2 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 2 | <1% |
| Unknown | 1014 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 205 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 189 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 154 | 15% |
| Researcher | 131 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 43 | 4% |
| Other | 115 | 11% |
| Unknown | 198 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 154 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 126 | 12% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 125 | 12% |
| Engineering | 81 | 8% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 48 | 5% |
| Other | 254 | 25% |
| Unknown | 247 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 223. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 March 2024.
All research outputs
#174,103
of 25,663,438 outputs
Outputs from Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine
#1
of 235 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#522
of 195,747 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,663,438 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 235 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 195,747 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them