ReviewBioResearch open access2017
Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells: Global Research Trends.
Review in BioResearch open access, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Blood-Brain Barrier and Neurodegenerative Diseases-Modeling with iPSC-Derived Brain Cells.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- Biallelic correction of sickle cell disease-derived induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) confirmed at the protein level through serum-free iPS-sac/erythroid differentiation.Stem cells translational medicine · 2020Article
- Impact of Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells in Bone Repair and Regeneration.Current osteoporosis reports · 2019Review
- Patent Application Trends of Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell Technologies in the United States, Japanese, and European Applications.BioResearch open access · 2019Review
- Recent Trends in Research with Human Pluripotent Stem Cells: Impact of Research and Use of Cell Lines in Experimental Research and Clinical Trials.Stem cell reports · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC) was first described more than 10 years ago and is currently used in various basic science and clinical research fields. The aim of this report is to examine the trends in research using iPSCs over the last 10 years. The 2006-2016 PubMed database was searched using the MeSH term "induced pluripotent stem cells." Only original research articles were selected, with a total of 3323 articles. These were classified according to research theme into reprogramming, differentiation protocols for specific cells and/or tissues, pathophysiological research on diseases, and discovery of new drugs, and then the trends over the years were analyzed. We also focused on 232 research publications on the pathophysiological causes of diseases and drug discovery with impact factor (IF; Thomson Reuters) of six or more. The IF of each article was summed up by year, by main target disease, and by country, and the total IF score was expressed as trends of research. The trends of research activities of reprogramming and differentiation on specific cells and/or tissues reached maxima in 2013/2014. On the other hand, research on pathophysiology and drug discovery increased continuously. The 232 articles with IF ≥6 dealt with neurological, immunological/hematological, cardiovascular, and digestive tract diseases, in that order. The majority of articles were published from the United States, followed by Japan, Germany, and United Kingdom. In conclusion, iPSCs have become a general tool for pathophysiological research on disease and drug discovery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.