Template:Did you know nominations/Cell isolation


 * The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as |this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Gatoclass (talk) 09:37, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Cell isolation

 * ... that cell isolation techniques can be used to help study individual living cells from tissue normally discarded during coronary artery bypass surgery? Source: "Surplus human tissue can sometimes be obtained at the time of planned surgery, for example specimens of right atrial appendage are often excised and discarded during coronary artery bypass surgery" (Reference: Voigt et al. 2015 "Methods for isolating atrial cells from large mammals and humans")

Created by PeaBrainC (talk). Self-nominated at 20:19, 3 January 2018 (UTC).


 * Overall:Symbol confirmed.svg
 * New? Moved from draft space to mainspace 12/29, good
 * Length? 4900 chars readable prose, good
 * Compliance? Article has no outstanding cleanup flags. It has no outstanding clean up flags. Article has no history in main page. It uses primarily scholarly sources as is expected for articles on medical subjects. Article has single image, in commons and signed by holder into CC license. Earwig's copyvio detector does yield 20% from a pubmed publication but only highlights names and titles in the further reading section. Good
 * Hook? It is 150 chars, which is within limit. Subject matter is established in article and in provided source. No special content considerations needed (elections, BLP, etc.), Claim is supported in article. Claim source as provided is offline, but was able to find full text with search, and claim is supported therein. good
 * Other? No quid pro quo, but only has had one other submission reviewed and is exempt. No image. Good
 * Note that I am a new reviewer and will need a second opinion--Cincotta1 (talk) 21:25, 4 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Symbol possible vote.svg I have pulled this from prep as I cannot locate the above quote in the given source. Gatoclass (talk) 12:29, 24 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi Gatoclass. I'm sorry if I've been unclear - only my second DYK and was a little unsure of the syntax for the source.  I thought I ought to quote the line in the Cell Isolation page and then where it was originally sourced from.  The quote is therefore from the Cell Isolation article, while the source that this part of the article is based on (Voigt et al. 2015) contains the following text in section 8.2.1. (page 193)  "Although in principle whole human hearts can be perfused using a Langendorff perfusion system we are not aware of any study that has used the perfusion method to obtain human atrial myocytes. To the best of our knowledge, all published studies use the so called chunk-method to obtain human atrial myocytes, which is described below.  During routine open-heart surgery with extracorporeal circulation, the tip of the right atrial appendage is usually removed and may be used for isolation of atrial cardiomyocytes." Hope this clears things up.


 * Hi - if you're happy with my response would you be able to restore the nomination to a Prep?  I'm very happy to provide more info if there are further questions outstanding.  Thanks.  PeaBrainC (talk) 19:01, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I can't follow your explanation. What are you referring to when you refer to the "cell isolation page" as opposed to the "cell isolation article"? Please provide some links so that I can follow your argument a bit more clearly. Thanks, Gatoclass (talk) 11:15, 15 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi, apologies if I wasn't clear. The source for this hook can be found in a review article written by Voigt et al. 2015 which can be found as an open access paper on PubMed via this link https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26186893.  The line in this paper supporting the hook which can be found in section 8.2.1 reads "During routine open-heart surgery with extracorporeal circulation, the tip of the right atrial appendage is usually removed and may be used for isolation of atrial cardiomyocytes."


 * The line within the Wikipedia Page "Cell isolation" supporting the hook reads "Surplus human tissue can sometimes be obtained at the time of planned surgery, for example specimens of right atrial appendage are often excised and discarded during coronary artery bypass surgery".


 * As I'm relatively new to this game and keen to avoid these problems in the future, how would you prefer this to have been expressed in the initial nomination - I had hoped that a mention of a peer-reviewed paper supporting the hook would be sufficient, but I was clearly wrong! Thanks, PeaBrainC (talk) 12:34, 16 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Okay, I can't actually recall the problem I initially had with verification of this article now as it's too long ago, but I think your latest explanation clears things up regardless. I would just suggest that you make the connection between the article and the hook a little more clear, perhaps by changing the sentence in the article which reads "When dealing with solid tissues, obtaining tissue may be more challenging" to "When dealing with solid tissues, obtaining tissue for cell isolation may be more challenging" or making some similar change. Though the connection may seem obvious to you, I think it's worth remembering that most people will be very unfamiliar with these concepts and may need things to be spelled out a little more plainly. Gatoclass (talk) 12:56, 16 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks . I have amended the article as per your suggestion.   PeaBrainC (talk) 21:36, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

, I was going to promote this but I just noticed that your source refers to "routine open-heart surgery" but the hook and article refer to "coronary artery bypass surgery". I have no idea whether these are the same thing, but the rule here is that the hook must accurately reflect both the article and source, so I think you need to resolve this discrepancy before I can give this nomination a pass. Thanks, Gatoclass (talk) 11:09, 23 February 2018 (UTC)


 * , for the purposes of this hook the two terms means the same thing (coronary artery bypass grafting is a form of open heart surgery). However, to make things clear I have amended the line in the article, and perhaps would one of these hooks be acceptable instead ?
 * ALT1 ... that cell isolation techniques can be used to help study individual living cells from tissue normally discarded during open heart surgery? Source: "During routine open-heart surgery with extracorporeal circulation, the tip of the right atrial appendage is usually removed and may be used for isolation of atrial cardiomyocytes" (Reference: Voigt et al. 2015 "Methods for isolating atrial cells from large mammals and humans")


 * Or even


 * ALT2 ... tissue normally thrown away during open heart surgery can be used to study individual living heart cells using cell isolation techniques? Source: "During routine open-heart surgery with extracorporeal circulation, the tip of the right atrial appendage is usually removed and may be used for isolation of atrial cardiomyocytes" (Reference: Voigt et al. 2015 "Methods for isolating atrial cells from large mammals and humans")


 * Thanks, PeaBrainC (talk) 08:56, 3 March 2018 (UTC)