ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2021
The Progress of Stem Cell Technology for Skeletal Regeneration.
Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systemic and local effects of vancomycin-combined thermal exposure on Staphylococcus aureus infected rat femurs: a comparative study of hyperthermia and thermal ablation.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Article
- Addressing osteoblast senescence: Molecular pathways and the frontier of anti-ageing treatments.Clinical and translational medicine · 2025Review
- Bone fusion materials: past, present, and future.Asian spine journal · 2025Article
- Post-Transcriptional Regulatory Crosstalk between MicroRNAs and Canonical TGF-β/BMP Signalling Cascades on Osteoblast Lineage: A Comprehensive Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- How the mechanical microenvironment of stem cell growth affects their differentiation: a review.Stem cell research & therapy · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Skeletal disorders, such as osteoarthritis and bone fractures, are among the major conditions that can compromise the quality of daily life of elderly individuals. To treat them, regenerative therapies using skeletal cells have been an attractive choice for patients with unmet clinical needs. Currently, there are two major strategies to prepare the cell sources. The first is to use induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) or embryonic stem cells (ESCs), which can recapitulate the skeletal developmental process and differentiate into various skeletal cells. Skeletal tissues are derived from three distinct origins: the neural crest, paraxial mesoderm, and lateral plate mesoderm. Thus, various protocols have been proposed to recapitulate the sequential process of skeletal development. The second strategy is to extract stem cells from skeletal tissues. In addition to mesenchymal stem/stromal cells (MSCs), multiple cell types have been identified as alternative cell sources. These cells have distinct multipotent properties allowing them to differentiate into skeletal cells and various potential applications for skeletal regeneration. In this review, we summarize state-of-the-art research in stem cell differentiation based on the understanding of embryogenic skeletal development and stem cells existing in skeletal tissues. We then discuss the potential applications of these cell types for regenerative medicine.
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.