Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24217518›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Neurology2013

Advances in peripheral nerve regeneration.

Jami Scheib, Ahmet Höke

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Neurology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 367 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
367citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
14.3field-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

367 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 756 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Beneficially Stressing the Peripheral Nervous System to Repair.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

307 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.

Jami ScheibJohns Hopkins Hospital, Department of Neurology, 855 North Wolfe Street, Rangos 248, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA.
Ahmet Höke
Johns Hopkins Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rodent models of nerve injury have increased our understanding of peripheral nerve regeneration, but clinical applications have been scarce, partly because such models do not adequately recapitulate the situation in humans. In human injuries, axons are often required to extend over much longer distances than in mice, and injury leaves distal nerve fibres and target tissues without axonal contact for extended amounts of time. Distal Schwann cells undergo atrophy owing to the lack of contact with proximal neurons, which results in reduced expression of neurotrophic growth factors, changes in the extracellular matrix and loss of Schwann cell basal lamina, all of which hamper axonal extension. Furthermore, atrophy and denervation-related changes in target tissues make good functional recovery difficult to achieve even when axons regenerate all the way to the target tissue. To improve functional outcomes in humans, strategies to increase the speed of axonal growth, maintain Schwann cells in a healthy, repair-capable state and keep target tissues receptive to reinnervation are needed. Use of rodent models of chronic denervation will facilitate our understanding of the molecular mechanisms of peripheral nerve regeneration and create the potential to test therapeutic advances.

Indexed as

Nerve RegenerationAnimalsAxonsDisease Models, AnimalHumansMicePeripheral Nerve InjuriesPeripheral NervesRatsSchwann Cells

Identifiers

PMID24217518
OpenAlexW2091562888

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.