Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33324662›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in medicine2020

Cryopreservation as a Key Element in the Successful Delivery of Cell-Based Therapies-A Review.

Julie Meneghel, Peter Kilbride, G John Morris

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 65 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
65citing papers in PubMed
5.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

65 citing papers in PubMed, 133 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Cryopreservation of jaguar (Animal reproduction · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Slow freezing and 3DAnimal reproduction · 2026
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

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

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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Julie MeneghelAsymptote, Cytiva, Danaher Corporation, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Peter KilbrideAsymptote, Cytiva, Danaher Corporation, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
G John MorrisAsymptote, Cytiva, Danaher Corporation, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Asymptote (United Kingdom) · GBDanaher (United Kingdom) · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cryopreservation is a key enabling technology in regenerative medicine that provides stable and secure extended cell storage for primary tissue isolates and constructs and prepared cell preparations. The essential detail of the process as it can be applied to cell-based therapies is set out in this review, covering tissue and cell isolation, cryoprotection, cooling and freezing, frozen storage and transport, thawing, and recovery. The aim is to provide clinical scientists with an overview of the benefits and difficulties associated with cryopreservation to assist them with problem resolution in their routine work, or to enable them to consider future involvement in cryopreservative procedures. It is also intended to facilitate networking between clinicians and cryo-researchers to review difficulties and problems to advance protocol optimization and innovative design.

Indexed as

cell therapycryochain optimizationcryogenic storagecryogenic transportcryopreservationfreezingthawing

Identifiers

PMID33324662
PMCPMC7727450
OpenAlexW3110149129

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.