Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31270501›Full record

ReviewNature medicine2019

Ethical development of stem-cell-based interventions.

Amanda MacPherson, Jonathan Kimmelman

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Ethics of Early Clinical Trials of Bio-Artificial Organs.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2022
    Article
  13. Mesenchymal stem cell therapy for severe COVID-19.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2021
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Amanda MacPhersonBiomedical Ethics Unit, STREAM Research Group, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
Jonathan KimmelmanBiomedical Ethics Unit, STREAM Research Group, McGill University, Montreal, Canada. jonathan.kimmelman@mcgill.ca.
McGill University · CA

Funding

CIHR PJT-148726
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The process of developing new and complex stem-cell-based therapeutics is incremental and requires decades of sustained collaboration among different stakeholders. In this Perspective, we address key ethical and policy challenges confronting the clinical translation of stem-cell-based interventions (SCBIs), including premature diffusion of SCBIs to clinical practice, assessment of risk in trials, obtaining valid informed consent for research participants, balanced and complete scientific reporting and public communications, regulation, and equitable access to treatment. We propose a way forward for translating these therapies with the above challenges in mind.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicEthics, ResearchHealth Care CostsHumansInformed ConsentProspective StudiesStem Cell Transplantation

Identifiers

PMID31270501
OpenAlexW2953974985

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.