Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22265818›Full record

ReviewExperimental neurology2013

Stem cells as a potential therapy for epilepsy.

Steven N Roper, Dennis A Steindler

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Experimental neurology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 60 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. hUMSC vs. hUMSC-Exosome: Which One Is Better for Epilepsy?Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  7. Stem Cell Therapy in Treating Epilepsy.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Steven N RoperDepartment of Neurosurgery and the McKnight Brain Institute, University of Florida, USA. roper@neurosurgery.ufl.edu
Dennis A Steindler
Allen Institute for Brain Science · USUniversity of Florida · US

Funding

STEM/PROGENITOR CELL PROTECTION FOR PARKINSON'S DISEASER01NS055165 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA · PI STEINDLER, DENNIS A. · 2007 to 2011
$1.6M
NINDS NIH HHS NS055165NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS055165
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Neural stem cells and neural progenitors (NSC/NPs) hold great promise in neuro-restorative therapy due to their remarkable capacity for self-renewal, plasticity, and ability to integrate into host brain circuitry. Some types of epilepsy would appear to be excellent targets for this type of therapy due to known alterations in local circuitry based on loss or malfunction of specific types of neurons in specific brain structures. Potential sources for NSC/NPs include the embryonic blastocyst, the fetal brain, and adult brain and non-neural tissues. Each of these cell types has potential strengths and weaknesses as candidates for clinical therapeutic agents. This article reviews some of the major types of NSC/NPs and how they have been studied with regard to synaptic integration into host brain circuits. It also reviews how these transplanted cells develop and interact with host brain cells in animal models of epilepsy. The field is still wide open with a number of very promising results but there are also some major challenges that will need to be addressed prior to considering clinical applications for epilepsy.

Indexed as

AnimalsEpilepsyHumansNeural Stem CellsStem Cell Transplantation

Identifiers

PMID22265818
PMCPMC4438310
OpenAlexW1967175584

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.