Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32244282›Full record

ReviewGenes2020

Mother and Embryo Cross-Communication.

Anna Idelevich, Felipe Vilella

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Genes, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing 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

33 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

2 authors.

Anna IdelevichIgenomix, Boston, MA 02210, USA.
Felipe VilellaIgenomix Foundation, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Hospital Clínico (INCLIVA), 46010 Valencia, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-0039-9846

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Endometrial receptivity is a biosensor for embryo quality, as embryos with reduced developmental potential are rejected. However, embryo quality only accounts for an estimated one-third of implantation failures, with suboptimal endometrial receptivity accounting for the remaining two-thirds. As pregnancy progresses, a uterus continues to engage in close communication with an embryo/fetus, exchanging information in the form of endocrine, paracrine, and other cues. Given the long mammalian gestation period, this dialogue is intricate, diverse, and, currently, not fully understood. Recent progress and the availability of high-throughput techniques, including transcriptomics, proteomics, and metabolomics, has allowed the simultaneous examination of multiple molecular changes, enhancing our knowledge in this area. This review covers the known mechanisms of mother-embryo cross-communication gathered from animal and human studies.

Indexed as

Cell CommunicationMaternal-Fetal ExchangeEmbryo, MammalianFemaleHumansMetabolomeMothersPregnancyProteomeTranscriptomeProteomeembryouteruswindow of implantation

Identifiers

PMID32244282
PMCPMC7230353

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.