Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22007147›Full record

ReviewJournal of biomedicine & biotechnology2011

Epithelial cell coculture models for studying infectious diseases: benefits and limitations.

Benjamin L Duell, Allan W Cripps, Mark A Schembri, Glen C Ulett

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of biomedicine & biotechnology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing 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

41 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Study Models forMicroorganisms · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Frontiers in immunology · 2024
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Propagation of Dental and Respiratory Cells and Organs in Microgravity.Journal of visualized experiments : JoVE · 2021
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Polish journal of microbiology · 2019
    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

4 authors.

Benjamin L DuellSchool of Medical Sciences and Griffith Health Institute, Centre for Medicine and Oral Health, Griffith University, Southport, QLD 4222, Australia.
Allan W Cripps
Mark A Schembri
Glen C Ulett

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Countless in vitro cell culture models based on the use of epithelial cell types of single lineages have been characterized and have provided insight into the mechanisms of infection for various microbial pathogens. Diverse culture models based on disease-relevant mucosal epithelial cell types derived from gastrointestinal, genitourinary, and pulmonary organ systems have delineated many key host-pathogen interactions that underlie viral, parasitic, and bacterial disease pathogenesis. An alternative to single lineage epithelial cell monoculture, which offers more flexibility and can overcome some of the limitations of epithelial cell culture models based on only single cell types, is coculture of epithelial cells with other host cell types. Various coculture models have been described, which incorporate epithelial cell types in culture combination with a wide range of other cell types including neutrophils, eosinophils, monocytes, and lymphocytes. This paper will summarize current models of epithelial cell coculture and will discuss the benefits and limitations of epithelial cell coculture for studying host-pathogen dynamics in infectious diseases.

Indexed as

Models, BiologicalCell Culture TechniquesCoculture TechniquesCommunicable DiseasesEpithelial CellsHost-Pathogen InteractionsHumans

Identifiers

PMID22007147
PMCPMC3189631

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.