ReviewBiomarker insights2022
The Availability of Human Biospecimens to Support Biomarker Research.
Review in Biomarker insights, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Identifying and Addressing Barriers to Live Primary Prostate Cancer Cell Research in Veterans.Cancer research communications · 2026Pooled it
- Ethical navigation of biobanking establishment in Ukraine: learning from the experience of developing countries.Journal of medical ethics · 2026Article
- Optical super-resolution histology of formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue samples: challenges and opportunities.Nature communications · 2025Review
- Building a Decentralized Biobanking App for Research Transparency and Patient Engagement: Participatory Design Study.JMIR human factors · 2025Article
- Applying Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable Principles to Biospecimens and Biobanks.Biopreservation and biobanking · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Preserved biospecimens held in biobank inventories and clinical archives are important resources for biomarker research. Recent advances in technologies have led to an increase in use of clinical archives in particular, in order to study retrospective cohorts and to generate data relevant to tissue biomarkers. This raises the question of whether the current sizes of biobank inventories are appropriate to meet the demands of biomarker research. This commentary discusses this question by considering data concerning overall biobank and biospecimen numbers to estimate current biospecimen supply and use. The data suggests that biospecimen supply exceeds current demand. Therefore, it may be important for individual biobanks to reassess the targets for their inventories, consider culling unused portions of these inventories, and shift resources towards providing prospective custom biobanking services.
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.