Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37903969›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Molecular cell biology2024

Local and systemic mechanisms that control the hair follicle stem cell niche.

Bing Zhang, Ting Chen

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Molecular cell biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 95 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
95citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
31.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

95 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 105 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. CRISPR-MediatedCells · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

35 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Bing ZhangSchool of Life Sciences, Westlake University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China. zhangbing@westlake.edu.cn.
Ting ChenNational Institute of Biological Sciences, Beijing, China. chenting@nibs.ac.cn.
National Institute of Biological Sciences, Beijing · CNWestlake University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Hair follicles are essential appendages of the mammalian skin, as hair performs vital functions of protection, thermoregulation and sensation. Hair follicles harbour exceptional regenerative abilities as they contain multiple somatic stem cell populations such as hair follicle stem cells (HFSCs) and melanocyte stem cells. Surrounding the stem cells and their progeny, diverse groups of cells and extracellular matrix proteins are organized to form a microenvironment (called 'niche') that serves to promote and maintain the optimal functioning of these stem cell populations. Recent studies have shed light on the intricate nature of the HFSC niche and its crucial role in regulating hair follicle regeneration. In this Review, we describe how the niche serves as a signalling hub, communicating, deciphering and integrating both local signals within the skin and systemic inputs from the body and environment to modulate HFSC activity. We delve into the recent advancements in identifying the cellular and molecular nature of the niche, providing a holistic perspective on its essential functions in hair follicle morphogenesis, regeneration and ageing.

Indexed as

Hair FollicleStem Cell NicheAgingAnimalsHairMammalsStem Cells

Identifiers

PMID37903969
OpenAlexW4388024025

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.