ArticleCell proliferation2011
Towards responsible cord blood banking models.
Article in Cell proliferation, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hybrid umbilical cord blood banking: literature review.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2024Pooled it
- A comparative analysis of the opinions from European national and international ethics committees regarding the collection, storage and use of umbilical cord blood.Blood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangue · 2012Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
On 31 May 2010, 14 072 567 bone marrow/apheresis donors registered in 44 countries and 426 501 cord blood units banked in 26 countries for public use were available to treat candidates to haemopoietic stem cell transplant lacking a family related compatible donor. Despite these impressive numbers, additional efforts are required to ensure that all patients, including those from ethnic minorities, can promptly find a suitable donor. Governments, clinicians, scientists, patients and stakeholders should share the responsibility to develop haemopoietic stem cell donation and cord blood banking models able to fully match all patient needs. In this regard, current scientific evidence and prevalent opinions among expert clinicians support solidaristic cord blood donation for public use against the alternative option of commercial autologous cord blood storage.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.