Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26491661›Full record

ReviewBioMed research international2015

Oligodendrocyte Precursor Cells in Spinal Cord Injury: A Review and Update.

Ning Li, Gilberto K K Leung

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BioMed research international, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

50 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Neural and Glial Regulation of Angiogenesis in CNS in Ischemic Stroke.Bulletin of experimental biology and medicine · 2024
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Spinal cord injury: molecular mechanisms and therapeutic interventions.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2023
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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.

Ning LiDepartment of Surgery, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Queen Mary Hospital, Pokfulam, Hong Kong.
Gilberto K K LeungDepartment of Surgery, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Queen Mary Hospital, Pokfulam, Hong Kong.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Spinal cord injury (SCI) is a devastating condition to individuals, families, and society. Oligodendrocyte loss and demyelination contribute as major pathological processes of secondary damages after injury. Oligodendrocyte precursor cells (OPCs), a subpopulation that accounts for 5 to 8% of cells within the central nervous system, are potential sources of oligodendrocyte replacement after SCI. OPCs react rapidly to injuries, proliferate at a high rate, and can differentiate into myelinating oligodendrocytes. However, posttraumatic endogenous remyelination is rarely complete, and a better understanding of OPCs' characteristics and their manipulations is critical to the development of novel therapies. In this review, we summarize known characteristics of OPCs and relevant regulative factors in both health and demyelinating disorders including SCI. More importantly, we highlight current evidence on post-SCI OPCs transplantation as a potential treatment option as well as the impediments against regeneration. Our aim is to shed lights on important knowledge gaps and to provoke thoughts for further researches and the development of therapeutic strategies.

Indexed as

Cell DifferentiationCell ProliferationAnimalsHumansOligodendrogliaSpinal Cord InjuriesStem Cells

Identifiers

PMID26491661
PMCPMC4600489

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.