Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26039206›Full record

ArticleBone marrow transplantation2015

Who is the best alternative allotransplant donor?

R P Gale, M Eapen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bone marrow transplantation, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. 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.

R P GaleDepartment of Medicine, Division of Experimental Medicine, Haematology Centre, Imperial College London, London, UK.
M EapenCenter for International Blood and Marrow Research, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA.

Funding

Data Resource for Analyzing Blood &Marrow TransplantsU24CA076518 · NCI · MEDICAL COLLEGE OF WISCONSIN · PI Amy M Moskop, Bronwen Shaw · 1998 to 2026
$105.2M
NCI NIH HHS U24 CA076518
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Assuming that most physicians will chose an HLA-identical sibling as the best allotransplant donor, the question arises who is the best alternative donor when an HLA-identical sibling is unavailable? The most commonly used alternative donors are HLA-identical or -mismatched unrelated donors, HLA-matched or -mismatched umbilical cord blood donor or a related, HLA-haplotype-matched related donors. Each alternative donor option has advantages and disadvantages. We discuss selected aspects of these issues based on data from randomized clinical trials and observational databases. However, because there are limited data to address specific clinical settings, quantification of expert opinion is sometimes needed.

Indexed as

Cord Blood Stem Cell TransplantationDatabases, FactualHLA AntigensSiblingsUnrelated DonorsAdolescentAdultAgedAllograftsDonor SelectionFemaleHistocompatibility TestingHumansMaleMiddle AgedRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicHLA Antigens

Identifiers

PMID26039206
PMCPMC4520408

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.