Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26449725›Full record

ArticleLife sciences, society and policy2015

Cord blood banking - bio-objects on the borderlands between community and immunity.

Nik Brown, Rosalind Williams

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Life sciences, society and policy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Nik BrownDepartment of Sociology, Science and Technology Studies Unit (SATSU), University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK. nik.brown@york.ac.uk.
Rosalind WilliamsDepartment of Sociology, Science and Technology Studies Unit (SATSU), University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Umbilical cord blood (UCB) has become the focus of intense efforts to collect, screen and bank haematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) in hundreds of repositories around the world. UCB banking has developed through a broad spectrum of overlapping banking practices, sectors and institutional forms. Superficially at least, these sectors have been widely distinguished in bioethical and policy literature between notions of the 'public' and the 'private', the commons and the market respectively. Our purpose in this paper is to reflect more critically on these distinctions and to articulate the complex practical and hybrid nature of cord blood as a 'bio-object' that straddles binary conceptions of the blood economies. The paper draws upon Roberto Esposito's reflections on biopolitics and his attempt to transcend the dualistic polarisations of immunity and community, or the private and the public. We suggest that his thoughts on immunitary hospitality resonate with many of the actual features and realpolitik of a necessarily internationalised and globally distributed UCB 'immunitary regime'.

Indexed as

Blood BanksCord Blood Stem Cell TransplantationHematopoietic Stem CellsBlood DonorsFetal BloodGlobal HealthHumansInformed ConsentInternational CooperationPolicy MakingPoliticsPrivate SectorPublic SectorStem Cell ResearchBio-objectsBiopoliticsCommunityCord bloodImmunity

Identifiers

PMID26449725
PMCPMC4598333

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.