Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28255526›Full record

ReviewCurrent pathobiology reports2017

Retinal Degeneration and Regeneration-Lessons From Fishes and Amphibians.

Divya Ail, Muriel Perron

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current pathobiology reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 55 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Mesenchymal-derived neural progenitors underlie localbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. VersatileProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. The immune response is a critical regulator of zebrafish retinal pigment epithelium regeneration.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Divya AilParis-Saclay Institute of Neuroscience, CNRS, Univ. Paris-Sud, Université Paris-Saclay, Orsay, France.
Muriel PerronParis-Saclay Institute of Neuroscience, CNRS, Univ. Paris-Sud, Université Paris-Saclay, Orsay, France.
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRInstitut des Neurosciences Paris-Saclay · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewRetinal degenerative diseases have immense socio-economic impact. Studying animal models that recapitulate human eye pathologies aids in understanding the pathogenesis of diseases and allows for the discovery of novel therapeutic strategies. Some non-mammalian species are known to have remarkable regenerative abilities and may provide the basis to develop strategies to stimulate self-repair in patients suffering from these retinal diseases. RECENT

findingsNon-mammalian organisms, such as zebrafish and SUMMARY: This review aims to emphasize first on the importance of zebrafish and

Indexed as

Ciliary marginal zoneMüller glial cellsRetinal degenerationRetinal pigment epitheliumRetinal regenerationRetinal stem cells

Identifiers

PMID28255526
PMCPMC5309292
OpenAlexW2581020313

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.