One-unit versus two-unit cord-blood transplantation.

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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Prospective Evaluation of Unrelated Donor Cord Blood and Haploidentical Donor Access Reveals Graft Availability Varies by Patient Ancestry: Practical Implications for Donor Selection.Biology of blood and marrow transplantation : journal of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation · 2017
   Trial
2. Reduced intensity haplo plus single cord transplant compared to double cord transplant: improved engraftment and graft-versus-host disease-free, relapse-free survival.Haematologica · 2016
   Trial

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  One-unit versus two-unit cord-blood transplantation for hematologic cancers.2014
• Comment on
  One-unit versus two-unit cord-blood transplantation.2015
• Comment on
  One-unit versus two-unit cord-blood transplantation.2015

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as