Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26733310›Full record

ArticleJournal of mathematical biology2016

Inferring average generation via division-linked labeling.

Tom S Weber, Leïla Perié, Ken R Duffy

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of mathematical biology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Modeling T Cell Fate.Annual review of immunology · 2023
    Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

3 authors.

Tom S WeberHamilton Institute, Maynooth University, Maynooth, Ireland.
Leïla PeriéDivision of Immunology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Ken R DuffyHamilton Institute, Maynooth University, Maynooth, Ireland. ken.duffy@nuim.ie.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

For proliferating cells subject to both division and death, how can one estimate the average generation number of the living population without continuous observation or a division-diluting dye? In this paper we provide a method for cell systems such that at each division there is an unlikely, heritable one-way label change that has no impact other than to serve as a distinguishing marker. If the probability of label change per cell generation can be determined and the proportion of labeled cells at a given time point can be measured, we establish that the average generation number of living cells can be estimated. Crucially, the estimator does not depend on knowledge of the statistics of cell cycle, death rates or total cell numbers. We explore the estimator's features through comparison with physiologically parameterized stochastic simulations and extrapolations from published data, using it to suggest new experimental designs.

Indexed as

Cell DivisionModels, BiologicalCell CountCell CycleCellsComputer SimulationProbabilityStaining and LabelingAverage generation inferenceBranching processesStochastically decorated trees

Identifiers

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.