Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26537392›Full record

ReviewStem cells translational medicine2015

Regenerative Medicine Build-Out.

Andre Terzic, Michael A Pfenning, Gregory J Gores, C Michel Harper

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Stem cells translational medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 87 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Mass Customized Outlook for Regenerative Heart Failure Care.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021
    Review
  16. Regenerative medicine clinical readiness.Regenerative medicine · 2021
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Andre TerzicMayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA terzic.andre@mayo.edu.
Michael A PfenningMayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Gregory J GoresMayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
C Michel HarperMayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Mayo Clinic · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

unlabelledRegenerative technologies strive to boost innate repair processes and restitute normative impact. Deployment of regenerative principles into practice is poised to usher in a new era in health care, driving radical innovation in patient management to address the needs of an aging population challenged by escalating chronic diseases. There is urgency to design, execute, and validate viable paradigms for translating and implementing the science of regenerative medicine into tangible health benefits that provide value to stakeholders. A regenerative medicine model of care would entail scalable production and standardized application of clinical grade biotherapies supported by comprehensive supply chain capabilities that integrate sourcing and manufacturing with care delivery. Mayo Clinic has rolled out a blueprint for discovery, translation, and application of regenerative medicine therapies for accelerated adoption into the standard of care. To establish regenerative medical and surgical service lines, the Mayo Clinic model incorporates patient access, enabling platforms and delivery. Access is coordinated through a designated portal, the Regenerative Medicine Consult Service, serving to facilitate patient/provider education, procurement of biomaterials, referral to specialty services, and/or regenerative interventions, often in clinical trials. Platforms include the Regenerative Medicine Biotrust and Good Manufacturing Practice facilities for manufacture of clinical grade products for cell-based, acellular, and/or biomaterial applications. Care delivery leverages dedicated interventional suites for provision of regenerative services. Performance is tracked using a scorecard system to inform decision making. The Mayo Clinic roadmap exemplifies an integrated organization in the discovery, development, and delivery of regenerative medicine within a growing community of practice at the core of modern health care. SIGNIFICANCE: Regenerative medicine is at the vanguard of health care poised to offer solutions for many of today's incurable diseases. Accordingly, there is a pressing need to develop, deploy, and demonstrate a viable framework for rollout of a regenerative medicine model of care. Translation of regenerative medicine principles into practice is feasible, yet clinical validity and utility must be established to ensure approval and adoption. Standardized and scaled-up regenerative products and services across medical and surgical specialties must in turn achieve a value-added proposition, advancing intended outcome beyond current management strategies.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareEducation, Medical, ContinuingRegenerative MedicineTranslational Research, BiomedicalClinical Trials as TopicHumans

Identifiers

PMID26537392
PMCPMC4675513
OpenAlexW2191170983

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.