Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21451511›Full record

ReviewNature methods2011

Clonal interrogation of stem cells.

Kristin Hope, Mickie Bhatia

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature methods, 2011. 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
–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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Illumination of neural development byCell regeneration (London, England) · 2018
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Progress in myeloma stem cells.American journal of blood research · 2011
    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

2 authors.

Kristin HopeStem Cell and Cancer Research Institute, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada and the Department of Biochemistry and Biomedical Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Mickie Bhatia

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Individual stem cells are functionally defined by their self-renewal and differentiation potential. Methods for clonal analysis are essential for understanding stem cells, particularly given the increasing evidence for stem-cell heterogeneity. Stem cells reside within complex microenvironments, making single-cell analysis particularly challenging. Furthermore, simultaneous molecular and functional characterization of single stem cells is not trivial. Here we explore clonal assays applied to stem cell biology and their use in understanding the cellular and molecular basis of stem-cell identity.

Indexed as

AnimalsCell Culture TechniquesCell DifferentiationCell LineageClone CellsHematopoietic Stem CellsHumansPluripotent Stem CellsSingle-Cell AnalysisStem Cells

Identifiers

PMID21451511

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.