ArticleJournal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences2012
Embryonic stem cells: An alternative approach to developmental toxicity testing.
Article in Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Alternative Developmental Toxicity Screening Methods Using Chick Embryo-Based Models.Journal of applied toxicology : JAT · 2026Review
- Insight on cytotoxic NHC gold(I) halide complexes evaluated in multifaceted culture systems.Current research in toxicology · 2024Article
- Engineering spatial-organized cardiac organoids for developmental toxicity testing.Stem cell reports · 2021Article
- Combination of the BeWo b30 placental transport model and the embryonic stem cell test to assess the potential developmental toxicity of silver nanoparticles.Particle and fibre toxicology · 2020Article
- Toxicity of nano- and ionic silver to embryonic stem cells: a comparative toxicogenomic study.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2017Article
- Nonclinical aspects of venous thrombosis in pregnancy.Birth defects research. Part C, Embryo today : reviews · 2015Review
- Transcriptomic characterization of C57BL/6 mouse embryonic stem cell differentiation and its modulation by developmental toxicants.PloS one · 2014Article
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
Stem cells in the body have a unique ability to renew themselves and give rise to more specialized cell types having functional commitments. Under specified growth conditions, these cell types remain unspecialized but can be triggered to become specific cell type of the body such as heart, nerve, or skin cells. This ability of embryonic stem cells for directed differentiation makes it a prominent candidate as a screening tool in revealing safer and better drugs. In addition, genetic variations and birth defects caused by mutations and teratogens affecting early human development could also be studied on this basis. Moreover, replacement of animal testing is needed because it involves ethical, legal, and cost issues. Thus, there is a strong requirement for validated and reliable, if achievable, human stem cell-based developmental assays for pharmacological and toxicological screening.
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.