Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24358022›Full record

SynthesisPLoS biology2013

Stem cell transplantation in traumatic spinal cord injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis of animal studies.

Ana Antonic, Emily S Sena, Jennifer S Lees, Taryn E Wills, Peta Skeers, Peter E Batchelor, Malcolm R Macleod, David W Howells

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PLoS biology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 62 papers, 15 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
62citing papers in PubMed, 15 pooled it
10.5field-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

62 citing papers in PubMed, 15 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 132 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Is cell transplantation a reliable therapeutic strategy for spinal cord injury in clinical practice? A systematic review and meta-analysis from 22 clinical controlled trials.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2019
    Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Rewiring the Spine-Cutting-Edge Stem Cell Therapies for Spinal Cord Repair.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  19. Review
  20. Article

2 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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Ana AntonicDepartment of Medicine, University of Melbourne Lance Townsend Building, Austin Hospital, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia.
Emily S SenaFlorey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health, Victoria, Australia ; Division of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Edinburgh, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Jennifer S LeesDivision of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Edinburgh, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Taryn E WillsDepartment of Medicine, University of Melbourne Lance Townsend Building, Austin Hospital, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia ; Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health, Victoria, Australia.
Peta SkeersDepartment of Medicine, University of Melbourne Lance Townsend Building, Austin Hospital, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia.
Peter E BatchelorDepartment of Medicine, University of Melbourne Lance Townsend Building, Austin Hospital, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia ; Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health, Victoria, Australia.
Malcolm R MacleodDivision of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Edinburgh, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
David W HowellsFlorey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health, Victoria, Australia.
Western General Hospital · GBAustin Hospital · AUUniversity of Melbourne · AUFlorey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health · AU

Funding

National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research NC/L000970/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Spinal cord injury (SCI) is a devastating condition that causes substantial morbidity and mortality and for which no treatments are available. Stem cells offer some promise in the restoration of neurological function. We used systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression to study the impact of stem cell biology and experimental design on motor and sensory outcomes following stem cell treatments in animal models of SCI. One hundred and fifty-six publications using 45 different stem cell preparations met our prespecified inclusion criteria. Only one publication used autologous stem cells. Overall, allogeneic stem cell treatment appears to improve both motor (effect size, 27.2%; 95% Confidence Interval [CI], 25.0%-29.4%; 312 comparisons in 5,628 animals) and sensory (effect size, 26.3%; 95% CI, 7.9%-44.7%; 23 comparisons in 473 animals) outcome. For sensory outcome, most heterogeneity between experiments was accounted for by facets of stem cell biology. Differentiation before implantation and intravenous route of delivery favoured better outcome. Stem cell implantation did not appear to improve sensory outcome in female animals and appeared to be enhanced by isoflurane anaesthesia. Biological plausibility was supported by the presence of a dose-response relationship. For motor outcome, facets of stem cell biology had little detectable effect. Instead most heterogeneity could be explained by the experimental modelling and the outcome measure used. The location of injury, method of injury induction, and presence of immunosuppression all had an impact. Reporting of measures to reduce bias was higher than has been seen in other neuroscience domains but were still suboptimal. Motor outcomes studies that did not report the blinded assessment of outcome gave inflated estimates of efficacy. Extensive recent preclinical literature suggests that stem-cell-based therapies may offer promise, however the impact of compromised internal validity and publication bias mean that efficacy is likely to be somewhat lower than reported here.

Indexed as

Stem Cell TransplantationAnimalsDisease Models, AnimalSpinal Cord InjuriesTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID24358022
PMCPMC3866091
OpenAlexW1975322262

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.