Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31813106›Full record

ReviewMolecular and cellular biochemistry2020

ROS and diseases: role in metabolism and energy supply.

Shenshu Yang, Gaojian Lian

Erratum issuedAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Molecular and cellular biochemistry, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 350 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
350citing 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

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

  1. An Updated Understanding of Human Embryonic Fragmentation.Reproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.) · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Shenshu YangHengyang Medical School, University of South China, Hengyang City, Hunan Province, 421001, China. 517691576@qq.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3641-3312
Gaojian LianHengyang Medical School, University of South China, Hengyang City, Hunan Province, 421001, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Researches dedicated to reactive oxygen species (ROS) had been performed for decades, yet the outcomes remain controversial. With the relentless effort of studies, researchers have explored the role of ROS in biosystem and various diseases. ROS are beneficial for biosystem presenting as signalling molecules and enhancing immunologic defence. However, they also have harmful effects such as causing tissue and organ damages. The results are controversial in studies focusing on ROS and ROS-related diseases by regulating ROS with inhibitors or promotors. These competing results hindered the process for further investigation of the specific mechanisms lying behind. The opinions presented in this review interpret the researches of ROS from a different dimension that might explain the competing results of ROS introduced so far from a broader perspective. This review brings a different thinking to researchers, with the neglected features and potentials of ROS, to relate their works with ROS and to explore the mechanisms between their subject and ROS.

Indexed as

Gene Regulatory NetworksAnimalsEnergy MetabolismHumansReactive Oxygen SpeciesSignal TransductionReactive Oxygen SpeciesDiseasesHomeostasisMetabolismPathologyROS

Identifiers

PMID31813106
PMCPMC7089381

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.