Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33815977›Full record

ReviewCureus2021

Efficacy of Stem Cell Application in Diabetes Mellitus: Promising Future Therapy for Diabetes and Its Complications.

Faten R Bani Hamad, Neelam Rahat, Kavya Shankar, Nicholas Tsouklidis

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
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

4 authors.

Faten R Bani HamadMedicine, California Institute of Behavioral Neurosciences & Psychology, Fairfield, USA.
Neelam RahatMedicine, California Institute of Behavioral Neurosciences & Psychology, Fairfield, USA.
Kavya ShankarNeurology, California Institute of Behavioral Neurosciences & Psychology, Fairfield, USA.
Nicholas TsouklidisHealth Care Administration, University of Cincinnati Health, Cincinnati, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a serious and common chronic disease with high morbidity and mortality rates. Recently, stem cell-based therapy has shown considerable promise as a future therapeutic modality for DM. This review aims to summarize the types of stem cells that have the most successful evidence in treating type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), and also to assess the safety and efficacy of different types of stem cells in the treatment of DM. PubMed, MEDLINE, and PubMed Central databases were searched up to October 15, 2020, using medical subject heading (MeSH) terms. After application of inclusion criteria and exclusion criteria, 10 studies were included in our final review: six T1DM studies including 120 patients, and four T2DM studies including 65 patients. Our data showed that autologous and allogeneic stem cell therapy is a relatively safe and effective method for selected individuals with DM. The best therapeutic outcome was achieved by transplantation of bone marrow hemopoietic stem cells (BM-HSCs) for T1DM and bone marrow mononuclear cells (BM-MNCs) along with mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) for T2DM. However, patients with DKA are not a good candidate for stem cell transplantation. Further rigorous experiments are needed in order to be able to establish stem cell-based therapies as the future standard of care for treating DM.

Indexed as

bm-hscbm-mncdiabetes mellitusmscstem cellstem cell therapystem cell transplantationt1dmt2dmucb

Identifiers

PMID33815977
PMCPMC8007200

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.