ReviewNeural regeneration research2012
Does repair of spinal cord injury follow the evolutionary theory?
Review in Neural regeneration research, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- TGF-β-induced fibrotic scar formation limits recovery of spinal cord injury.Bone research · 2026Article
- From thought to action: The organization of spinal projecting neurons.Cell reports · 2025Review
- Neurotrophins and their receptors in the peripheral nervous system and non-nervous tissue of fish.Fish physiology and biochemistry · 2025Review
- Growth associated protein 43 and neurofilament immunolabeling in the transected lumbar spinal cord of lizard indicates limited axonal regeneration.Neural regeneration research · 2022Article
- Transcriptomic Approaches to Neural Repair.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lower vertebrates, such as fish and amphibians, and higher vertebrates in embryonic development can acquire complete regeneration of complex body structures, including the spinal cord, an important part of the central nervous system. However, with species evolution and development, this regenerative capacity gradually weakens and even disappears, but the cellular and molecular mechanisms remain poorly understood. We explored the differences in mechanisms of spinal cord regeneration capability between lower and higher vertebrates, investigated differences in their cellular and molecular mechanisms and between the spinal cord structures of lower vertebrates and mammals, such as rat and monkey, to search for theoretical evidence and therapeutic targets for nerve regeneration in human spinal cord.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.