Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28976005›Full record

ArticleClinical and experimental immunology2018

A comparison of TRECs and flow cytometry for naive T cell quantification.

S P Adams, S Kricke, E Ralph, N Gilmour, K C Gilmour

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and experimental immunology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Flow Cytometry Confirmation Post Newborn Screening for SCID in England.International journal of neonatal screening · 2021
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

S P AdamsSIHMDS Haematology, Camelia Botnar Laboratories, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Trust, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2650-2848
S KrickeSIHMDS Haematology, Camelia Botnar Laboratories, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Trust, London, UK.
E RalphImmunology, Camelia Botnar Laboratories, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Trust, London, UK.
N GilmourUCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, UK.
K C GilmourImmunology, Camelia Botnar Laboratories, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Trust, London, UK.
Great Ormond Street Hospital · GBUniversity College London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Assessment of thymic output by measurement of naive T cells is carried out routinely in clinical diagnostic laboratories, predominantly using flow cytometry with a suitable panel of antibodies. Naive T cell measurements can also be made using molecular analyses to quantify T cell receptor excision circle (TRECs) levels in sorted cells from peripheral blood. In this study we have compared TRECs levels retrospectively with CD45RA

Indexed as

Blood CellsFlow CytometryFollow-Up StudiesHumansImmunologic MemoryLeukocyte Common AntigensMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesPlatelet Endothelial Cell Adhesion Molecule-1Receptors, Antigen, T-CellRetrospective StudiesT-LymphocytesT-Lymphocyte SubsetsTumor Necrosis Factor Receptor Superfamily, Member 7Leukocyte Common AntigensPlatelet Endothelial Cell Adhesion Molecule-1Receptors, Antigen, T-CellTumor Necrosis Factor Receptor Superfamily, Member 7CD31CD45RAnaive T cellsTRECs

Identifiers

PMID28976005
PMCPMC5758381
OpenAlexW2764323620

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.