Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31156469›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in physiology2019

Chami Kim-Jo, Jean-Luc Gatti, Marylène Poirié

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in physiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing 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

34 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. ThebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Venom vesicles from the parasitoidbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. The Enigmas of Tissue Closure: Inspiration fromCurrent issues in molecular biology · 2024
    Review
  12. Article
  13. iScience · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Infection and immunity · 2023
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Natural selection has driven the recurrent loss of an immunity gene that protectsProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Chami Kim-JoINRA, CNRS, Institut Sophia Agrobiotech, Université Côte d'Azur, Sophia Antipolis, France.
Jean-Luc GattiINRA, CNRS, Institut Sophia Agrobiotech, Université Côte d'Azur, Sophia Antipolis, France.
Marylène PoiriéINRA, CNRS, Institut Sophia Agrobiotech, Université Côte d'Azur, Sophia Antipolis, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Host-parasitoid interactions are among the most studied interactions between invertebrates because of their fundamental interest - the evolution of original traits in parasitoids - and applied, parasitoids being widely used in biological control. Immunity, and in particular cellular immunity, is central in these interactions, the host encapsulation response being specific for large foreign bodies such as parasitoid eggs. Although already well studied in this species, recent data on

Indexed as

DrosophilaencapsulationhematopoiesisimmunityLeptopilinaparasitoid waspvenom

Identifiers

PMID31156469
PMCPMC6529592

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.