Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12665626›Full record

ReviewMolecular pathology : MP2003

The new stem cell biology: something for everyone.

S L Preston, M R Alison, S J Forbes, N C Direkze, R Poulsom, N A Wright

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Molecular pathology : MP, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing 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

37 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Melanocyte stem cells: biology and current aspects.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2012
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Stem cells in microfluidics.Biomicrofluidics · 2011
    Article
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

6 authors.

S L PrestonDepartment of Histopathology, Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Turner Street, London E1 2AD, UK. sean.preston@cancer.org.uk
M R Alison
S J Forbes
N C Direkze
R Poulsom
N A Wright

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The ability of multipotential adult stem cells to cross lineage boundaries (transdifferentiate) is currently causing heated debate in the scientific press. The proponents see adult stem cells as an attractive alternative to the use of embryonic stem cells in regenerative medicine (the treatment of diabetes, Parkinson's disease, etc). However, opponents have questioned the very existence of the process, claiming that cell fusion is responsible for the phenomenon. This review sets out to provide a critical evaluation of the current literature in the adult stem cell field.

Indexed as

Stem Cell TransplantationAdultCell DifferentiationCell Transformation, NeoplasticGenetic TherapyHematopoietic Stem CellsHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationHumansNeoplastic Stem CellsStem Cells

Identifiers

PMID12665626
PMCPMC1187299

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.