Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27890924›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Nephrology2017

Cellular plasticity in kidney injury and repair.

Monica Chang-Panesso, Benjamin D Humphreys

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Nephrology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 98 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
98citing 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

98 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. iScience · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. From GWAS Signals to Causal Genes in Chronic Kidney Disease.Current issues in molecular biology · 2026
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. INSIGHTS INTO ACUTE KIDNEY INJURY AND TRANSITION TO CHRONIC KIDNEY DISEASE BY SINGLE-CELL TECHNOLOGIES.Transactions of the American Clinical and Climatological Association · 2025
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Regenerative Role of Lrig1+ Cells in Kidney Repair.Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN · 2024
    Article
  20. Article

38 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.

Monica Chang-PanessoDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Washington University in Saint Louis School of Medicine, 660 S. Euclid Avenue, CB 8126, Saint Louis, Missouri 63110, USA.
Benjamin D HumphreysDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Washington University in Saint Louis School of Medicine, 660 S. Euclid Avenue, CB 8126, Saint Louis, Missouri 63110, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Terminally differentiated cells can be reprogrammed to pluripotency or directly to another differentiated cell type in vitro, a capacity termed cellular plasticity. Plasticity is not limited to in vitro manipulations but rather represents an important aspect of the regenerative response to injury in organs. Differentiated adult cells retain the capacity to dedifferentiate, adopting a progenitor-like phenotype after injury or, alternatively, to transdifferentiate, directly converting to a different mature cell type. Emerging concepts on cellular plasticity have relevance to our understanding of repair after kidney injury, including epithelial regeneration. Here we discuss work published in the past 5 years on the cellular hierarchies and mechanisms underlying kidney injury and repair, with a particular focus on potential roles for cellular plasticity in this response.

Indexed as

Cell PlasticityRegenerationAnimalsCell DifferentiationHumansKidneyMultipotent Stem Cells

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.