ArticleStem cell reports2023
Businesses marketing purported stem cell treatments and exosome therapies for COVID-19: An analysis of direct-to-consumer online advertising claims.
Article in Stem cell reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Unproven stem cell-based interventions marketed as treatments in Panama: An urgent call for enforcement actions.Stem cell reports · 2026Article
- The next phase in Long COVID research: addressing the ethical challenges in trials of disease-modifying treatments.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Review
- Therapeutic Potential of Extracellular Vesicles (Exosomes) Derived From Platelet-Rich Plasma: A Literature Review.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2025Review
- The urgent need for clear and concise regulations on exosome-based interventions.Stem cell reports · 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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We identified 38 businesses advertising purported stem cell interventions and exosome products for COVID-19. These companies operated or facilitated access to 60 clinics. More than 75% of these clinics were based in the United States and Mexico. Thirty-six of the businesses marketed their stem cell and exosome products as treatments for Long COVID, six advertised them as "immune boosters," five claimed to treat patients in the acute infection phase, and two claimed their products were preventive. The least expensive product cost $2,950, the most expensive was $25,000, and the average listed cost for patients was $11,322. The promotion of these products is concerning because they have not been approved by national regulators and do not appear to be supported by convincing safety and efficacy data.
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.