Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31427916›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in neuroscience2019

Therapeutic Potential of Neurotrophins for Repair After Brain Injury: A Helping Hand From Biomaterials.

Josh Houlton, Nashat Abumaria, Simon F R Hinkley, Andrew N Clarkson

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

Review in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 69 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
69citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
8.2field-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

69 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 133 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Therapeutic Mechanisms of Exercise in Parkinson's Disease.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review

9 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Josh HoultonBrain Health Research Centre, Department of Anatomy, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
Nashat AbumariaState Key Laboratory of Medical Neurobiology, MOE Frontiers Center for Brain Science, Institute of Brain Science, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Simon F R HinkleyThe Ferrier Research Institute, Victoria University of Wellington, Petone, New Zealand.
Andrew N ClarksonBrain Health Research Centre, Department of Anatomy, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
University of Otago · NZShanghai Medical College of Fudan University · CNVictoria University of Wellington · NZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Stroke remains the leading cause of long-term disability with limited options available to aid in recovery. Significant effort has been made to try and minimize neuronal damage following stroke with use of neuroprotective agents, however, these treatments have yet to show clinical efficacy. Regenerative interventions have since become of huge interest as they provide the potential to restore damaged neural tissue without being limited by a narrow therapeutic window. Neurotrophins, such as brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), and their high affinity receptors are actively produced throughout the brain and are involved in regulating neuronal activity and normal day-to-day function. Furthermore, neurotrophins are known to play a significant role in both protection and recovery of function following neurodegenerative diseases such as stroke and traumatic brain injury (TBI). Unfortunately, exogenous administration of these neurotrophins is limited by a lack of blood-brain-barrier (BBB) permeability, poor half-life, and rapid degradation. Therefore, we have focused this review on approaches that provide a direct and sustained neurotrophic support using pharmacological therapies and mimetics, physical activity, and potential drug delivery systems, including discussion around advantages and limitations for use of each of these systems. Finally, we discuss future directions of biomaterial drug-delivery systems, including the incorporation of heparan sulfate (HS) in conjunction with neurotrophin-based interventions.

Indexed as

BDNFelectrospun fibersHSPGhydrogelmicrosphere encapsulationneurotrophinsp75 neurotrophic receptorTrk receptor

Identifiers

PMID31427916
PMCPMC6688532
OpenAlexW2961162867

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.