Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17142883›Full record

ReviewStem cell reviews2006

Hematopoietic stem cells: expression profiling and beyond.

E Camilla Forsberg, Deepta Bhattacharya, Irving L Weissman

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Stem cell reviews, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. A new stem cell biology: the continuum and microvesicles.Transactions of the American Clinical and Climatological Association · 2012
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

E Camilla ForsbergInstitute of Cancer and Stem Cell Biology and Medicine, Departments of Pathology and Developmental Biology, Stanford University Medical School, 279 Campus Drive, Stanford, CA 94305, USA. cforsber@stanford.edu
Deepta Bhattacharya
Irving L Weissman
Stanford University · US

Funding

MOLECULAR &CELLULAR IMMUNOBIOLOGYT32AI007290 · NIAID · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI Sean Curtis Bendall, Olivia M Martinez · 1985 to 2026
$27.0M
NIAID NIH HHS T32 AI007290
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review focuses on the genomics of mouse hematopoiesis, but also draws parallels to other systems and discusses issues common to the analysis of rare populations such as stem cells. As examples from the mouse blood forming system are used to illustrate several points, the authors first give a brief introduction to mouse hematopoiesis as a model system. We review the multiple microarray analyses that have been performed on various mouse hematopoietic subpopulations and comment on both technical and biological aspects of such experiments. The concept of stemness is discussed, and the importance of biological function of gene products, protein-protein interactions and molecular pathways highlighted. Finally, the authors discuss some major unresolved issues in hematopoiesis and discuss the potential uses of future microarray analysis as well as other genomic and functional approaches that might prove useful to further our understanding of hematopoiesis and other stem cell systems.

Indexed as

AnimalsGene Expression ProfilingHematopoietic Stem CellsMiceOligonucleotide Array Sequence Analysis

Identifiers

PMID17142883
OpenAlexW3162937550

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.