Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31562250›Full record

ReviewDisease models & mechanisms2019

Model organisms at the heart of regeneration.

Eleanor L Price, Joaquim M Vieira, Paul R Riley

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Disease models & mechanisms, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Avian cardiomyocyte architecture and what it reveals about the evolution of the vertebrate heart.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2022
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. International journal of molecular sciences · 2021
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. 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.

Eleanor L PriceBurdon Sanderson Cardiac Science Centre, Department of Physiology, Anatomy and Genetics, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3PT, UK.
Joaquim M VieiraBurdon Sanderson Cardiac Science Centre, Department of Physiology, Anatomy and Genetics, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3PT, UK.
Paul R RileyBurdon Sanderson Cardiac Science Centre, Department of Physiology, Anatomy and Genetics, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3PT, UK paul.riley@dpag.ox.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-9862-7332

Funding

British Heart Foundation RG/13/9/30269British Heart Foundation RG/18/5/33532British Heart Foundation RM/13/3/30159
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Heart failure is a major cause of death worldwide owing to the inability of the adult human heart to regenerate after a heart attack. However, many vertebrate species are capable of complete cardiac regeneration following injury. In this Review, we discuss the various model organisms of cardiac regeneration, and outline what they have taught us thus far about the cellular and molecular responses essential for optimal cardiac repair. We compare across different species, highlighting evolutionarily conserved mechanisms of regeneration and demonstrating the importance of developmental gene expression programmes, plasticity of the heart and the pathophysiological environment for the regenerative response. Additionally, we discuss how the findings from these studies have led to improvements in cardiac repair in preclinical models such as adult mice and pigs, and discuss the potential to translate these findings into therapeutic approaches for human patients following myocardial infarction.

Indexed as

Models, AnimalAnimalsHeartHumansMammalsModels, BiologicalRegenerationRegenerative MedicineCardiac regenerationCardiac repairCardiomyocytesMyocardial infarctionRegenerative medicine

Identifiers

PMID31562250
PMCPMC6826025

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.