Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30323950›Full record

ReviewNPJ Regenerative medicine2018

The convergence of regenerative medicine and rehabilitation: federal perspectives.

L F Rose, E J Wolf, T Brindle, A Cernich, W K Dean, C L Dearth, M Grimm, A Kusiak, R Nitkin, K Potter and 3 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in NPJ Regenerative medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing 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

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Network Medicine as a Tool to Enhance Regenerative Rehabilitation Practice.American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Stem Cell Therapy: From Idea to Clinical Practice.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Longevity leap: mind the healthspan gap.NPJ Regenerative medicine · 2021
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

13 authors.

L F Rose1Clinical and Rehabilitative Medicine Research Program, U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command, Fort Detrick, MD USA.
E J Wolf1Clinical and Rehabilitative Medicine Research Program, U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command, Fort Detrick, MD USA.
T BrindleDepartment of Veterans Affairs, Office of Research and Development, Washington DC, USA.
A Cernich3National Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute for Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3581-4189
W K Dean4Tissue Injury and Regenerative Medicine Project Management Office, U.S. Army Materiel Development Authority, U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command, Fort Detrick, MD USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5802-2753
C L Dearth5Extremity Trauma and Amputation Center of Excellence, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center & Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, MD USA.
M Grimm6Disability & Rehabilitation Engineering and Engineering of Biomedical Systems Programs, National Science Foundation, Alexandria, VA USA.
A KusiakDepartment of Veterans Affairs, Office of Research and Development, Washington DC, USA.
R Nitkin3National Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute for Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD USA.
K PotterDepartment of Veterans Affairs, Office of Research and Development, Washington DC, USA.
B J Randolph5Extremity Trauma and Amputation Center of Excellence, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center & Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, MD USA.
F Wang7National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD USA.
D YamaguchiVeteran's Administration, Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, CA USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Regenerative rehabilitation is the synergistic integration of principles and approaches from the regenerative medicine and rehabilitation fields, with the goal of optimizing form and function as well as patient independence. Regenerative medicine approaches for repairing or replacing damaged tissue or whole organs vary from utilizing cells (e.g., stem cells), to biologics (e.g., growth factors), to approaches using biomaterials and scaffolds, to any combination of these. While regenerative medicine offers tremendous clinical promise, regenerative rehabilitation offers the opportunity to positively influence regenerative medicine by inclusion of principles from rehabilitation sciences. Regenerative medicine by itself may not be sufficient to ensure successful translation into improving the function of those in the most need. Conversely, with a better understanding of regenerative medicine principals, rehabilitation researchers can better tailor rehabilitation efforts to accommodate and maximize the potential of regenerative approaches. Regenerative rehabilitative strategies can include activity-mediated plasticity, exercise dosing, electrical stimulation, and nutritional enhancers. Critical barriers in translating regenerative medicine techniques into humans may be difficult to overcome if preclinical studies do not consider outcomes that typically fall in the rehabilitation research domain, such as function, range of motion, sensation, and pain. The authors believe that encouraging clinicians and researchers from multiple disciplines to work collaboratively and synergistically will maximize restoration of function and quality of life for disabled and/or injured patients, including U.S. Veterans and Military Service Members (MSMs). Federal Government agencies have been investing in research and clinical care efforts focused on regenerative medicine (NIH, NSF, VA, and DoD), rehabilitation sciences (VA, NIH, NSF, DoD) and, more recently, regenerative rehabilitation (NIH and VA). As science advances and technology matures, researchers need to consider the integrative approach of regenerative rehabilitation to maximize the outcome to fully restore the function of patients.

Identifiers

PMID30323950
PMCPMC6180133

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.