Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31477739›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2019

A novel magnet-based scratch method for standardisation of wound-healing assays.

M Fenu, T Bettermann, C Vogl, N Darwish-Miranda, J Schramel, F Jenner, I Ribitsch

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Wound Healing Assay.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2027
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

7 authors.

M FenuUniversity of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Department of Companion Animals and Horses, Equine Surgery Unit, VETERM, Veterinaerplatz 1, 1210, Vienna, Austria.
T BettermannUniversity of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Department of Companion Animals and Horses, Equine Surgery Unit, VETERM, Veterinaerplatz 1, 1210, Vienna, Austria.
C VoglUniversity of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Department of Biomedical Sciences, Institute of Animal Breeding and Genetics, Veterinaerplatz 1, 1210, Vienna, Austria.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3996-7863
N Darwish-MirandaIST Austria, Bioimaging Facility, AM Campus 1, 3400, Klosterneuburg, Austria.
J SchramelUniversity of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Department of Companion Animals and Horses, Equine Surgery Unit, VETERM, Veterinaerplatz 1, 1210, Vienna, Austria.
F JennerUniversity of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Department of Companion Animals and Horses, Equine Surgery Unit, VETERM, Veterinaerplatz 1, 1210, Vienna, Austria. Florien.Jenner@vetmeduni.ac.at.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6977-1984
I RibitschUniversity of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Department of Companion Animals and Horses, Equine Surgery Unit, VETERM, Veterinaerplatz 1, 1210, Vienna, Austria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A novel magnetic scratch method achieves repeatability, reproducibility and geometric control greater than pipette scratch assays and closely approximating the precision of cell exclusion assays while inducing the cell injury inherently necessary for wound healing assays. The magnetic scratch is affordable, easily implemented and standardisable and thus may contribute toward better comparability of data generated in different studies and laboratories.

Indexed as

Magnetic PhenomenaWound HealingAnimalsBiological AssayCells, CulturedChondrocytesHorsesReference Standards

Identifiers

PMID31477739
PMCPMC6718675

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.