ArticleStem cell reviews and reports2014
Ethics of iPSC-based clinical research for age-related macular degeneration: patient-centered risk-benefit analysis.
Article in Stem cell reviews and reports, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- 3D bioprinting technologies and biomaterial-based scaffolds for wound healing: Insights into decellularized tissue-derived bioinks.Regenerative therapy · 2026Review
- Discovering the Potential of Natural Antioxidants in Age-Related Macular Degeneration: A Review.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- 3D Bioprinting and the Future of Surgery.Frontiers in surgery · 2020Review
- Print Me an Organ? Ethical and Regulatory Issues Emerging from 3D Bioprinting in Medicine.Science and engineering ethics · 2018Article
- Cellular Reparative Mechanisms of Mesenchymal Stem Cells for Retinal Diseases.International journal of molecular sciences · 2017Review
- CRISPR Genome Engineering for Human Pluripotent Stem Cell Research.Theranostics · 2017Review
- Pluripotent Stem Cells and Other Innovative Strategies for the Treatment of Ocular Surface Diseases.Stem cell reviews and reports · 2016Review
- Efficient derivation and inducible differentiation of expandable skeletal myogenic cells from human ES and patient-specific iPS cells.Nature protocols · 2015Article
- Tapping Stem Cells to Target AMD: Challenges and Prospects.Journal of clinical medicine · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The opportunity to undergo an induced pluripotent stem cell-based autologous transplant can strike patients as a chance for a cure from a debilitating condition with few options for respite. However, when clinical studies of this caliber present themselves, patients and researchers, each with their own set of motives, may find it difficult to take a balanced approach to evaluating them. We present a patient-centered risk-benefit analysis of the iPSC-based clinical research currently underway in Japan, including a survey of in vitro and in vivo tests that support this project, an in-depth discussion of risks, and further elucidation of considerations patients may wish to consider. The arguments presented will assist patients in undertaking a more informed decision-making process.
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.