Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17132873›Full record

ReviewStem cell reviews2005

Stem cell plasticity: the debate begins to clarify.

Alexandros Spyridonidis, Robert Zeiser, Marie Follo, Yannis Metaxas, Jürgen Finke

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Stem cell reviews, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Possible mechanisms of kidney repair.Fibrogenesis & tissue repair · 2009
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Epidermal stem cells in skin homeostasis and cutaneous carcinomas.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2007
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Alexandros SpyridonidisFreiburg University Medical Center, Department of Hematology/Oncology, Hugstetter Strasse 55, Freiburg, Germany. spyridonidis@mm11.ukl.uni-freiberg.de
Robert Zeiser
Marie Follo
Yannis Metaxas
Jürgen Finke
University Medical Center Freiburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The stem cell story begins with the recognition of the regenerative powers of the head of the Lernean Hydra and the human liver (Prometheus) by the ancient Greeks. In modern times, the adult human stem cell has been epitomized by the hematopoietic stem cell in the bone marrow. More recently, bone marrow derived cells were reported to contribute to nonhematopoietic organs, suggesting a level of plasticity not previously expected. However, other reports failed to repeat some of these results, resulting in a heated debate on the plasticity of adult stem cells that has crossed over into the public domain and become a matter of political impact on the use of embryonic vs adult stem cells for organ regeneration or gene therapy. This review discusses the current status of the "plasticity" debate and presents existing data on detection methodology, underlying mechanisms, physiological implications, and clinical significance.

Indexed as

Stem Cell TransplantationClinical Trials as TopicEpithelial CellsHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationHumansRegenerationStem CellsTransplantation Chimera

Identifiers

PMID17132873
OpenAlexW1966997558

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.