Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26539433›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2015

The Long Path of Human Placenta, and Its Derivatives, in Regenerative Medicine.

Antonietta R Silini, Anna Cargnoni, Marta Magatti, Stefano Pianta, Ornella Parolini

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 79 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
79citing 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

79 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Native Wound-Repair Proteins Retained in Multilayer Placental CAMPs.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

19 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors.

Antonietta R SiliniCentro di Ricerca "E. Menni", Fondazione Poliambulanza Istituto Ospedaliero , Brescia , Italy.
Anna CargnoniCentro di Ricerca "E. Menni", Fondazione Poliambulanza Istituto Ospedaliero , Brescia , Italy.
Marta MagattiCentro di Ricerca "E. Menni", Fondazione Poliambulanza Istituto Ospedaliero , Brescia , Italy.
Stefano PiantaCentro di Ricerca "E. Menni", Fondazione Poliambulanza Istituto Ospedaliero , Brescia , Italy.
Ornella ParoliniCentro di Ricerca "E. Menni", Fondazione Poliambulanza Istituto Ospedaliero , Brescia , Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the 1800s, a baby born with a caul, a remnant of the amniotic sack or fetal membranes, was thought to be lucky, special, or protected. Over time, fetal membranes lost their legendary power and were soon considered nothing more than biological waste after birth. However, placenta tissues have reclaimed their potential and since the early 1900s an increasing body of evidence has shown that these tissues have clinical benefits in a wide range of wound repair and surgical applications. Nowadays, there is a concerted effort to understand the mechanisms underlying the beneficial effects of placental tissues, and, more recently, cells derived thereof. This review will summarize the historical and current clinical applications of human placental tissues, and cells isolated from these tissues, and discuss some mechanisms thought to be responsible for the therapeutic effects observed after tissue and/or cell transplantation.

Indexed as

amniotic and chorionic membranesclinical trialshuman term placentaimmunomodulationparacrine effectregenerative medicinestem cellsumbilical cord

Identifiers

PMID26539433
PMCPMC4609884

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.