Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36425331›Full record

ArticleBiophysical reports2022

Cell cycle-dependent endocytosis of DNA-wrapped single-walled carbon nanotubes by neural progenitor cells.

Swetha Chandrasekar, Sophia Kuipa, Ana I Vargas, Tetyana Ignatova, Slava V Rotkin, Sabrina S Jedlicka

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Biophysical reports, 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 40% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Characterizing the Impact of the Cell Cycle on mRNA Lipid Nanoparticles.Journal of the American Chemical Society · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. The "Duckweed Dip": AquaticACS synthetic biology · 2024
    Article
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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Swetha ChandrasekarDepartment of Bioengineering, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania.
Sophia KuipaDepartment of Bioengineering, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania.
Ana I VargasDepartment of Bioengineering, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania.
Tetyana IgnatovaJoint School of Nanoscience and Nanoengineering, The University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Greensboro, North Carolina.
Slava V RotkinDepartment of Engineering Science & Mechanics, Materials Research Institute, The Pennsylvania State University, Millennium Science Complex, University Park, Pennsylvania.
Sabrina S JedlickaDepartment of Bioengineering, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania.
Lehigh University · USPennsylvania State University · USUniversity of North Carolina at Greensboro · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While exposure of C17.2 neural progenitor cells (NPCs) to nanomolar concentrations of carbon nanotubes (NTs) yields evidence of cellular substructure reorganization and alteration of cell division and differentiation, the mechanisms of NT entry are not understood. This study examines the entry modes of (GT)

Identifiers

PMID36425331
PMCPMC9680777
OpenAlexW4282945907

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.