Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23314905›Full record

ArticleJournal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle2013

Sources for skeletal muscle repair: from satellite cells to reprogramming.

Dario Sirabella, Luciana De Angelis, Libera Berghella

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Cardiac cachexia: hic et nunc.Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle · 2016
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Sarcopenia: describing rather than defining a condition.Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle · 2014
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Dario SirabellaDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Columbia University, 2920 Broadway, New York, NY, 10027-7164, USA.
Luciana De Angelis
Libera Berghella
Columbia University · USFondazione Santa Lucia · ITSapienza University of Rome · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Skeletal muscle regeneration is the process that ensures tissue repair after damage by injury or in degenerative diseases such as muscular dystrophy. Satellite cells, the adult skeletal muscle progenitor cells, are commonly considered to be the main cell type involved in skeletal muscle regeneration. Their mechanism of action in this process is extensively characterized. However, evidence accumulated in the last decade suggests that other cell types may participate in skeletal muscle regeneration. Although their actual contribution to muscle formation and regeneration is still not clear; if properly manipulated, these cells may become new suitable and powerful sources for cell therapy of skeletal muscle degenerative diseases. Mesoangioblasts, vessel associated stem/progenitor cells with high proliferative, migratory and myogenic potential, are very good candidates for clinical applications and are already in clinical experimentation. In addition, pluripotent stem cells are very promising sources for regeneration of most tissues, including skeletal muscle. Conditions such as muscle cachexia or aging that severely alter homeostasis may be counteracted by transplantation of donor and/or recruitment and activation of resident muscle stem/progenitor cells. Advantages and limitations of different cell therapy approaches will be discussed.

Identifiers

PMID23314905
PMCPMC3684700
OpenAlexW1998743787

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.