Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31455013›Full record

ReviewCells2019

Physiology, Pathology and Regeneration of Salivary Glands.

Cristina Porcheri, Thimios A Mitsiadis

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cells, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 89 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
89citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

89 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Potential of Saliva in Stroke Patients: A Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

29 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Cristina PorcheriUniversity of Zurich, Institute of Oral Biology, Plattenstrasse 11, CH-8032 Zurich, Switzerland. cristina.porcheri@zzm.uzh.ch.
Thimios A MitsiadisUniversity of Zurich, Institute of Oral Biology, Plattenstrasse 11, CH-8032 Zurich, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Salivary glands are essential structures in the oral cavity. A variety of diseases, such as cancer, autoimmune diseases, infections and physical traumas, can alter the functionality of these glands, greatly impacting the quality of life of patients. To date, no definitive therapeutic approach can compensate the impairment of salivary glands, and treatment are purely symptomatic. Understanding the cellular and molecular control of salivary glands function is, therefore, highly relevant for therapeutic purposes. In this review, we provide a starting platform for future studies in basic biology and clinical research, reporting classical ideas on salivary gland physiology and recently developed technology to guide regeneration, reconstruction and substitution of the functional organs.

Indexed as

Gene Regulatory NetworksAnimalsFemaleHumansMaleMiceRegenerationSalivary GlandsSex CharacteristicsSpecies Specificityexocrine glandsoral epitheliumsalivary gland-resident stem cellssalivary glandsxerostomia

Identifiers

PMID31455013
PMCPMC6769486

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.