ReviewStem cell reviews and reports2009
Private cord blood banking: current use and clinical future.
Review in Stem cell reviews and reports, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neonatal factors impacting umbilical cord blood unit characteristics.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Implications of maternal-fetal health on perinatal stem cell banking.Gene therapy · 2024Review
- Knowledge about umbilical cord blood banking among Greek citizens.Blood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangue · 2014Article
- Umbilical cord blood banking: from personal donation to international public registries to global bioeconomy.Journal of blood medicine · 2014Review
- Biobanking for research in surgery: are surgeons in charge for advancing translational research or mere assistants in biomaterial and data preservation?Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2013Review
- Concise review: mesenchymal stem cells for diabetes.Stem cells translational medicine · 2012Review
- Making the case for private cord blood banking: mission accomplished!: comment to Schmidt et al., Stem Cell Rev and Rep (2010) 6:234-236.Stem cell reviews and reports · 2011Article
- Umbilical cord blood banking: an update.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2011Review
- The science and ethics of induced pluripotency: what will become of embryonic stem cells?Mayo Clinic proceedings · 2011Article
- Stem cell-derived islet cells for transplantation.Current opinion in organ transplantation · 2011Review
- Making the case for private cord blood banking: mission failed! Comment to Hollands and McCauley, Stem Cell Rev and Rep 2009;5:195-203.Stem cell reviews and reports · 2010Article
- Generation of human induced pluripotent stem cells from umbilical cord matrix and amniotic membrane mesenchymal cells.The Journal of biological chemistry · 2010Article
- Feasibility of Umbilical Cord Blood Collection in Neonates at Risk of Brain Damage-A Step Toward Autologous Cell Therapy for a High-risk Population.Cell transplantationArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
International private umbilical cord blood banking has expanded rapidly in recent years since the first cord blood transplant which was 20 years ago. Private companies offer parents the opportunity to store umbilical cord blood for the possible future use by their child or other family members. The private cord blood industry has been criticised by a number of professional bodies including the EU Ethics Committee, the Royal College of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, the Royal College of Midwives and the US College of Paediatrics. This review presents the arguments from the opponents of private cord blood banking, and then makes the case for private cord banking based on the latest scientific and clinical evidence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
19603288What 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.