Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30906898›Full record

ReviewHeliyon2019

Experimental spinal cord injury and behavioral tests in laboratory rats.

Rakib Uddin Ahmed, Monzurul Alam, Yong-Ping Zheng

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Heliyon, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed
5.8field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 68 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. NeuroAiDBiomedicines · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rakib Uddin AhmedDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong.
Monzurul AlamDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong.
Yong-Ping ZhengDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong.
Hong Kong Polytechnic University · HK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) results in some serious neurophysiological consequences that alter healthy body functions and devastate the quality of living of individuals. To find a cure for SCI, researchers around the world are working on different neurorepair and neurorehabilitation modalities. To test a new treatment for SCI as well as to understand the mechanism of recovery, animal models are being widely used. Among them, SCI rat models are arguably the most prominent. Furthermore, it is important to select a suitable behavioral test to evaluate both the motor and sensory recovery following any therapeutic intervention. In this paper, we review the rat models of spinal injury and commonly used behavioral tests to serve as a useful guideline for neuroscientists in the field of SCI research.

Indexed as

AnatomyNeurologyNeurosciencePhysiologyRehabilitationSurgery

Identifiers

PMID30906898
PMCPMC6411514
OpenAlexW2921251556

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.