Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22467264›Full record

ReviewProtein & cell2012

Delineating nuclear reprogramming.

Jolene Ooi, Pentao Liu

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Protein & cell, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Jolene OoiWellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Hinxton CB10 1SA, UK.
Pentao Liu

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nuclear reprogramming is described as a molecular switch, triggered by the conversion of one cell type to another. Several key experiments in the past century have provided insight into the field of nuclear reprogramming. Previously deemed impossible, this research area is now brimming with new findings and developments. In this review, we aim to give a historical perspective on how the notion of nuclear reprogramming was established, describing main experiments that were performed, including (1) somatic cell nuclear transfer, (2) exposure to cell extracts and cell fusion, and (3) transcription factor induced lineage switch. Ultimately, we focus on (4) transcription factor induced pluripotency, as initiated by a landmark discovery in 2006, where the process of converting somatic cells to a pluripotent state was narrowed down to four transcription factors. The conception that somatic cells possess the capacity to revert to an immature status brings about huge clinical implications including personalized therapy, drug screening and disease modeling. Although this technology has potential to revolutionize the medical field, it is still impeded by technical and biological obstacles. This review describes the effervescent changes in this field, addresses bottlenecks hindering its advancement and in conclusion, applies the latest findings to overcome these issues.

Indexed as

AnimalsCell FusionCell LineageCellular ReprogrammingHumansNuclear Transfer TechniquesPluripotent Stem CellsTranscription FactorsTranscription Factors

Identifiers

PMID22467264
PMCPMC4875473

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.