Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32222115›Full record

ArticleStem cells translational medicine2020

Improving patient outcomes with regenerative medicine: How the Regenerative Medicine Manufacturing Society plans to move the needle forward in cell manufacturing, standards, 3D bioprinting, artificial intelligence-enabled automation, education, and training.

Joshua Hunsberger, Carl Simon, Claudia Zylberberg, Preveen Ramamoorthy, Thomas Tubon, Ram Bedi, Kurt Gielen, Caitlin Hansen, Lynn Fischer, Jed Johnson and 6 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Stem cells translational medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Tendon regeneration deserves better: focused review onFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Regenerative medicine clinical readiness.Regenerative medicine · 2021
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

16 authors.

Joshua HunsbergerRegenerative Medicine Manufacturing Society, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8683-6129
Carl SimonNational Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, Maryland, USA.
Claudia ZylberbergAkron Biotech, Boca Raton, Florida, USA.
Preveen RamamoorthyHealthTell, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado, USA.
Thomas TubonMadison College, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
Ram BediUniversity of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Kurt GielenMedace, Maastricht, Netherlands.
Caitlin HansenRoosterBio, Ballenger Creek, Maryland, USA.
Lynn FischerTitle21 Health Solutions, Pleasanton, California, USA.
Jed JohnsonNanofiber Solutions, Hilliard, Ohio, USA.
Priya BaraniakOrganaBio, LLC, South Miami, Florida, USA.
Behzad MahdaviLonza Group Ltd, Basel, Switzerland.
Taciana PereiraAllevi, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Michael HadjisavasQIAGEN, Hilden, Germany.
Shannon EakerGE Healthcare, Marlborough, Massachusetts, USA.
Cameron MillerDesign Interactive, Orlando, Florida, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Regenerative Medicine Manufacturing Society (RMMS) is the first and only professional society dedicated toward advancing manufacturing solutions for the field of regenerative medicine. RMMS's vision is to provide greater patient access to regenerative medicine therapies through innovative manufacturing solutions. Our mission is to identify unmet needs and gaps in regenerative medicine manufacturing and catalyze the generation of new ideas and solutions by working with private and public stakeholders. We aim to accomplish our mission through outreach and education programs and securing grants for public-private collaborations in regenerative medicine manufacturing. This perspective will cover four impact areas that the society's leadership team has identified as critical: (a) cell manufacturing and scale-up/out, respectively, for allogeneic and autologous cell therapies, (b) standards for regenerative medicine, (c) 3D bioprinting, and (d) artificial intelligence-enabled automation. In addition to covering these areas and ways in which the society intends to advance the field in a collaborative nature, we will also discuss education and training. Education and training is an area that is critical for communicating the current challenges, developing solutions to accelerate the commercialization of the latest technological advances, and growing the workforce in the rapidly expanding sector of regenerative medicine.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceAutomationBioprintingEducationHumansPrinting, Three-DimensionalRegenerative MedicineTissue EngineeringTreatment Outcomestem cellstechnologytissue engineeringtissue regeneration

Identifiers

PMID32222115
PMCPMC7308637

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.