ReviewCurrent reviews in musculoskeletal medicine2020
Ethical and Practical Considerations for Integrating Cellular ("Stem Cell") Therapy into Clinical Practice.
Review in Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advancing Intervertebral Disc Biology via Omics: Implications for Nucleus Pulposus Progenitor Cell-Based Regeneration.JOR spine · 2025Review
- New considerations in selecting donors for dental pulp stem cells: a pilot study.Biomedical engineering online · 2025Article
- Advancements in Regenerative Therapies for Orthopedics: A Comprehensive Review of Platelet-Rich Plasma, Mesenchymal Stem Cells, Peptide Therapies, and Biomimetic Applications.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Time to Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) Post Intra-Articular Injection.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Review
- Safety of intraarticular corticosteroid injection preceding hip and knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis amid resolving COVID-19 arthroplasty restrictions.Journal of hip preservation surgery · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewCellular therapies, also known as "stem cell" interventions (SCI), have undergone a rapid popularization in the USA and worldwide. The current review aimed at outlining (1) the ethical challenges facing the implementation of SCI; (2) the applicability of the currently available SCI; and (3) recommendations to achieve ethical, well-regulated incorporation of SCI in the clinical setting. RECENT
findingsConcerns regarding the inadequate characterization, poor adverse effects disclosure, and unorthodox, often inappropriate, market practices have engendered a genuine concern regarding the SCI compliance with ethical standards. Six instances of litigation on the basis of misrepresentation or inappropriate informed consent were recorded between 2012 and 2018. Such concerns have been furthered by the loopholes in the regulatory aspect governing the use of SCI coupled with the unclear literature-reported efficacy and diverse spectrum of profess indications. Similarly, the application of SCI in the clinical field is yet to prove its value. The uncertain efficacy, coupled with obscure true-costs of utilization, impedes a value-based assessment. A multidisciplinary approach involving legislative and medical professional societies should continue to advance regulations that govern SCI. A well-regulated system that allows for the ethical integration of SCI with appositely evidenced-based described benefits and risks should be sought.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.