ReviewMolecular biology and evolution2018
Diverse Evolutionary Origins and Mechanisms of Lens Regeneration.
Review in Molecular biology and evolution, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Lens regenerationiScience · 2023Article
- Soemmerring's Rings Developed around IOLs, in Human Donor Eyes, Can Present Internal Transparent Areas.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
- Formation of three-dimensional cell aggregates expressing lens-specific proteins in various cultures of human iris-derived tissue cells and iPS cells.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2022Article
- The miRNA-34a/Sirt1/p53 pathway in a rat model of lens regeneration.Annals of translational medicine · 2022Article
- Lens regeneration: scientific discoveries and clinical possibilities.Molecular biology reports · 2021Review
- Salamanders: The molecular basis of tissue regeneration and its relevance to human disease.Current topics in developmental biology · 2021Review
- Model systems for regeneration: salamanders.Development (Cambridge, England) · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In this review, we compare and contrast the three different forms of vertebrate lens regeneration: Wolffian lens regeneration, cornea-lens regeneration, and lens regeneration from lens epithelial cells. An examination of the diverse cellular origins of these lenses, their unique phylogenetic distribution, and the underlying molecular mechanisms, suggests that these different forms of lens regeneration evolved independently and utilize neither conserved nor convergent mechanisms to regulate these processes.
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.