Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31115266›Full record

ReviewRegenerative medicine2019

Nomenclature and heterogeneity: consequences for the use of mesenchymal stem cells in regenerative medicine.

Alison Wilson, Andrew Webster, Paul Genever

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Regenerative medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing 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

50 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. RNA sequencing identifiesCytotechnology · 2025
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Secretome as a Tool to Treat Neurological Conditions: Are We Ready?International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Needle to needle robot-assisted manufacture of cell therapy products.Bioengineering & translational medicine · 2022
    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

3 authors.

Alison WilsonDepartment of Biology, University of York, York YO10 5DD, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9438-7802
Andrew WebsterScience & Technology Studies Unit, Department of Sociology, University of York, York YO10 5DD, UK.
Paul GeneverDepartment of Biology, University of York, York YO10 5DD, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5730-8976

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are in development for many clinical indications, based both on 'stem' properties (tissue repair or regeneration) and on signaling repertoire (immunomodulatory and anti-inflammatory effects). Potential conflation of MSC properties with those of tissue-derived stromal cells presents difficulties in comparing study outcomes and represents a source of confusion in cell therapy development. Cultured MSCs demonstrate significant heterogeneity in clonogenicity and multi-lineage differentiation potential. However

Indexed as

Mesenchymal Stem CellsMesenchymal Stem Cell TransplantationRegenerative MedicineHumansTerminology as Topicadvanced therapyclinical trialheterogeneitymesenchymal stem cellsmesenchymal stromal cellsMSCnomenclatureregenerative medicinetherapeutic use

Identifiers

PMID31115266
PMCPMC7132560

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.