Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26626939›Full record

ReviewCold Spring Harbor perspectives in biology2015

Induced Pluripotency and Epigenetic Reprogramming.

Konrad Hochedlinger, Rudolf Jaenisch

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in biology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 61 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
61citing 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

61 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. TET3 protects theiScience · 2025
    Article
  5. Why are imprints unstable in pluripotent stem cells?Biochemical Society transactions · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. When everything is a master regulator, nothing is.Molecular biology of the cell · 2025
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Modulating DNA Polα Enhances Cell Reprogramming Across Species.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

1 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

2 authors.

Konrad HochedlingerHoward Hughes Medical Institute at Massachusetts General Hospital, Department of Stem Cell and Regenerative Biology, Harvard University and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts 02114.
Rudolf JaenischWhitehead Institute and Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142.

Funding

In Vitro Reprogramming of Somatic Cells into Pluripotent ES-like CellsR37HD045022 · NICHD · WHITEHEAD INSTITUTE FOR BIOMEDICAL RES · PI JAENISCH, RUDOLF · 2009 to 2017
$7.5M
NICHD NIH HHS R37 HD045022
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Induced pluripotency defines the process by which somatic cells are converted into induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) upon overexpression of a small set of transcription factors. In this article, we put transcription factor-induced pluripotency into a historical context, review current methods to generate iPSCs, and discuss mechanistic insights that have been gained into the process of reprogramming. In addition, we focus on potential therapeutic applications of induced pluripotency and emerging technologies to efficiently engineer the genomes of human pluripotent cells for scientific and therapeutic purposes.

Indexed as

Epigenesis, GeneticAnimalsCell Culture TechniquesCell DedifferentiationCell LineCloning, OrganismEmbryonic Stem CellsFemaleHumansInduced Pluripotent Stem CellsMiceNuclear Transfer TechniquesStochastic ProcessesTranscription FactorsX Chromosome InactivationTranscription Factors

Identifiers

PMID26626939
PMCPMC4665075

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.