Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25404180›Full record

ReviewCurrent urology reports2015

Production of urothelium from pluripotent stem cells for regenerative applications.

Stephanie L Osborn, Eric A Kurzrock

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current urology reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. The immune mechanisms of the urinary tract against infections.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Future Perspectives in Bladder Tissue Engineering.Current bladder dysfunction reports · 2014
    Article
  11. 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

2 authors.

Stephanie L OsbornDepartment of Urology, University of California, Davis School of Medicine, 4860 Y Street, Suite 3500, Sacramento, CA, 95817, USA, Stephanie.osborn@ucdmc.ucdavis.edu.
Eric A Kurzrock

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As bladder reconstruction strategies evolve, a feasible and safe source of transplantable urothelium becomes a major consideration for patients with advanced bladder disease, particularly cancer. Pluripotent stem cells, such as embryonic stem cells (ESCs) and induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs), are attractive candidates from which to derive urothelium as they renew and proliferate indefinitely in vitro and fulfill the non-autologous and/or non-urologic criteria, respectively, that is required for many patients. This review presents the latest advancements in differentiating urothelium from pluripotent stem cells in vitro in the context of current bladder tissue engineering strategies.

Indexed as

Guided Tissue RegenerationPlastic Surgery ProceduresPluripotent Stem CellsUrotheliumHumansIn Vitro TechniquesUrinary Bladder

Identifiers

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.