Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27066079›Full record

ReviewStem cells international2016

Cell-Based Therapy for Silicosis.

Miquéias Lopes-Pacheco, Elga Bandeira, Marcelo M Morales

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Stem cells international, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

52 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 122 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Artificial Stone Associated Silicosis: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Diosgenin ameliorates silica-induced tuberculosis in rats.Animal models and experimental medicine · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. A polymorphism in the FAM13A gene confers protection against tuberculosis in Brazilian workers exposed to silica.Jornal brasileiro de pneumologia : publicacao oficial da Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisilogia · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Miquéias Lopes-PachecoLaboratory of Cellular and Molecular Physiology, Institute of Biophysics Carlos Chagas Filho, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.
Elga BandeiraLaboratory of Cellular and Molecular Physiology, Institute of Biophysics Carlos Chagas Filho, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.
Marcelo M MoralesLaboratory of Cellular and Molecular Physiology, Institute of Biophysics Carlos Chagas Filho, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.
Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro · BRCzech Academy of Sciences, Institute of Biophysics · CZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Silicosis is the most common pneumoconiosis globally, with higher prevalence and incidence in developing countries. To date, there is no effective treatment to halt or reverse the disease progression caused by silica-induced lung injury. Significant advances have to be made in order to reduce morbidity and mortality related to silicosis. In this review, we have highlighted the main mechanisms of action that cause lung damage by silica particles and summarized the data concerning the therapeutic promise of cell-based therapy for silicosis.

Identifiers

PMID27066079
PMCPMC4811211
OpenAlexW2300382937

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.