Evidence map›Paper›PMID 14690476›Full record

ReviewJournal of anatomy2004

Chondroitin sulphate proteoglycans: preventing plasticity or protecting the CNS?

K E Rhodes, J W Fawcett

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of anatomy, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 84 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
84citing papers in PubMed
6.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

84 citing papers in PubMed, 299 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Perineuronal Nets and Their Role in Synaptic Homeostasis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2019
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

24 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 1 institution in 1 country.

K E RhodesCambridge Centre for Brain Repair, University of Cambridge, UK. ker28@hermes.cam.ac.uk
J W Fawcett
University of Cambridge · GB

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

It is well established that axonal regeneration in the adult CNS is largely unsuccessful. Numerous axon-inhibitory molecules are now known to be present in the injured CNS, and various strategies for overcoming these obstacles and enhancing CNS regeneration have been experimentally developed. Recently, the use of chondroitinase-ABC to treat models of CNS injury in vivo has proven to be highly beneficial towards regenerating axons, by degrading the axon-inhibitory chondroitin sulphate glycosaminoglycan chains found on many proteoglycans in the astroglial scar. This enzyme has now been shown to restore synaptic plasticity in the visual cortex of adult rats by disrupting perineuronal nets, which contain high levels of chondroitin sulphate proteoglycans (CS-PGs) and are expressed postnatally around groups of certain neurons in the normal CNS. The findings suggest exciting prospects for enhancing growth and plasticity in the adult CNS; however, some protective roles of CS-PGs in the CNS have also been demonstrated. Clearly many questions concerning the mechanisms regulating expression of extracellular matrix molecules in CNS pathology remain to be answered.

Indexed as

AnimalsAxonsBlood-Brain BarrierCentral Nervous SystemChondroitin ABC LyaseChondroitin SulfatesCicatrixHumansNerve RegenerationChondroitin ABC LyaseChondroitin Sulfates

Identifiers

PMID14690476
PMCPMC1571240
OpenAlexW2098974321

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.