ReviewStem cell reviews and reports2017
Reprogramming Enhancers in Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer, iPSC Technology, and Direct Conversion.
Review in Stem cell reviews and reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- SEC Mediates mAdvanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- Motor neuron-derived induced pluripotent stem cells as a drug screening platform for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2022Review
- Human Leukocyte Antigen Class I Pseudo-Homozygous Mesenchymal Stem Cells Derived from Human Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells.Stem cell reviews and reports · 2020Article
- Generation of Genetically Stable Human Direct-Conversion-Derived Neural Stem Cells Using Quantity Control of Proto-oncogene Expression.Molecular therapy. Nucleic acids · 2019Article
- Potential application of cell reprogramming techniques for cancer research.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2019Review
- Epigenetic Enzymes, Age, and Ancestry Regulate the Efficiency of Human iPSC Reprogramming.Stem cells (Dayton, Ohio) · 2018Article
- Determination of Oocyte-Manipulation, Zygote-Manipulation, and Genome-Reprogramming Effects on the Transcriptomes of Bovine Blastocysts.Frontiers in genetics · 2018Article
- Looking Back at the Past Year of Stem Cell Reviews and Reports.Stem cell reviews and reports · 2017Article
- Dnmt1s in donor cells is a barrier to SCNT-mediated DNA methylation reprogramming in pigs.Oncotarget · 2017Article
- The essentiality of non-coding RNAs in cell reprogramming.Non-coding RNA research · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Direct conversion of cell fate is a core technology for future regenerative medicine. However, the low reprogramming efficiency and low reproducibility are the largest obstacles blocking translational research of direct conversion technology. This review lists the major reprogramming enhancers verified in the representative reprogramming technologies of somatic cell nuclear transfer, induced pluripotent stem cell technology, and direct conversion, and categorizes them according to their functions. Ultimately, we strive to provide a practical plan to overcome the low reprogramming efficiency and low reproducibility of direct conversion.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27817181What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.