Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29126016›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in neurobiology2017

Go and stop signals for glial regeneration.

Alicia Hidalgo, Ann Logan

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in neurobiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 35% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. 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 1 institution in 1 country.

Alicia HidalgoSchool of Biosciences, University of Birmingham, UK. Electronic address: a.hidalgo@bham.ac.uk.
Ann LoganNeuroscience and Ophthalmology, College of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Birmingham, UK.
University of Birmingham · GB

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/H002278/1Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council G18986Medical Research Council MR/J011584/1Medical Research Council MR/N019016/1Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The regenerative response of ensheating glia to central nervous system (CNS) injury involves proliferation and differentiation, axonal re-enwrapment and some recovery of behaviour. Understanding this limited response could enable the enhancement of it. In Drosophila, the glial progenitor state is maintained by Notch, an activator of cell division and Prospero (Pros), a repressor. Injury provokes the activation of NFκB and up-regulation of Kon-tiki (Kon), driving cell proliferation. Homeostatic switch-off comes about as two negative feedback loops involving Pros terminate the response. Importantly, the functions of the kon and pros homologues NG2 and prox1, respectively, are conserved in mammalian NG2 glia. Controlling these genes is key for therapeutic manipulation of progenitors and stem cells to promote regeneration of the damaged CNS.

Indexed as

AnimalsCell DifferentiationCentral Nervous SystemHumansNerve RegenerationNeuroglia

Identifiers

PMID29126016
PMCPMC6419527
OpenAlexW2767495786

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.