Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30804758›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in cellular neuroscience2019

The Success and Failure of the Schwann Cell Response to Nerve Injury.

Kristjan R Jessen, Rhona Mirsky

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in cellular neuroscience, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 279 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
279citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
26.3field-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

279 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 464 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

219 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kristjan R JessenDepartment of Cell and Developmental Biology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Rhona MirskyDepartment of Cell and Developmental Biology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
University College London · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council G0600967Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The remarkable plasticity of Schwann cells allows them to adopt the Remak (non-myelin) and myelin phenotypes, which are specialized to meet the needs of small and large diameter axons, and differ markedly from each other. It also enables Schwann cells initially to mount a strikingly adaptive response to nerve injury and to promote regeneration by converting to a repair-promoting phenotype. These repair cells activate a sequence of supportive functions that engineer myelin clearance, prevent neuronal death, and help axon growth and guidance. Eventually, this response runs out of steam, however, because in the long run the phenotype of repair cells is unstable and their survival is compromised. The re-programming of Remak and myelin cells to repair cells, together with the injury-induced switch of peripheral neurons to a growth mode, gives peripheral nerves their strong regenerative potential. But it remains a challenge to harness this potential and devise effective treatments that maintain the initial repair capacity of peripheral nerves for the extended periods typically required for nerve repair in humans.

Indexed as

c-Junnerve injuryPNSregenerationrepair cellre-programmingSchwann cell

Identifiers

PMID30804758
PMCPMC6378273
OpenAlexW2911366120

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.