Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21267014›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Immunology2011

Presumed guilty: natural killer T cell defects and human disease.

Stuart P Berzins, Mark J Smyth, Alan G Baxter

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Immunology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 213 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
213citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
16.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

213 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 354 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Introduction to the Immune System.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2026
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

153 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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 3 institutions in 1 country.

Stuart P BerzinsDepartment of Microbiology & Immunology, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria 3010, Australia. berzins@unimelb.edu.au
Mark J Smyth
Alan G Baxter
James Cook University · AUPeter MacCallum Cancer Centre · AUUniversity of Melbourne · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Natural killer T (NKT) cells are important regulatory lymphocytes that have been shown in mouse studies, to have a crucial role in promoting immunity to tumours, bacteria and viruses, and in suppressing cell-mediated autoimmunity. Many clinical studies have indicated that NKT cell deficiencies and functional defects might also contribute to similar human diseases, although there is no real consensus about the nature of the NKT cell defects or whether NKT cells could be important for the diagnosis and/or treatment of these conditions. In this Review, we describe the approaches that have been used to analyse the NKT cell populations of various patient groups, suggest new strategies to determine how (or indeed, if) NKT cell defects contribute to human disease, and discuss the prospects for using NKT cells for therapeutic benefit.

Indexed as

AnimalsCommunicable DiseasesDiabetes Mellitus, Type 1HumansMiceMultiple SclerosisNatural Killer T-CellsNeoplasms

Identifiers

PMID21267014
OpenAlexW2024972563

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.