ReviewNeural regeneration research2022
Stroke recovery enhancing therapies: lessons from recent clinical trials.
Review in Neural regeneration research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07588932 (Relying on Pharmacotherapy to Improve Motor Gains of Robot-Assisted Upper-Extremity Rehabilitation in Chronic Stroke Survivors), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Relying on Pharmacotherapy to Improve Motor Gains of Robot-Assisted Upper-Extremity Rehabilitation in Chronic Stroke Survivors
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The efficacy of an allosteric modulator of the alpha 7 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor in a murine model of stroke.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2025Article
- Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for stroke rehabilitation: insights into the molecular and cellular mechanisms of neuroinflammation.Frontiers in immunology · 2023Review
- The Translational Potential of Microglia and Monocyte-Derived Macrophages in Ischemic Stroke.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Review
- Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for post stroke rehabilitation-a single center community experience.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Poststroke recovery processes include restoration or compensation of function, respectively functions initially lost or new functions acquired after an injury. Therapeutic interventions can enhance these processes and/or reduce processes impeding regeneration. Numerous experimental studies suggest great opportunities for such treatments, but the results from recent large clinical trials using neuromodulators such as dopamine and fluoxetine are disappointing. The reasons for this are manifold affecting forward translation of results from animals models into the human situation. This "translational road block" is defined by differences between animals and humans with regard to the genetic and epigenetic background, size and anatomy of the brain, cerebral vascular anatomy, immune system, as well as clinical function and behavior. Backward blockade includes the incompatible adaption of targets and outcomes in clinical trials with regard to prior preclinical findings. For example, the design of clinical recovery trials varies widely and was characterized by the selection of different clinical endpoints, the inclusion a broad spectrum of stroke subtypes and clinical syndromes as well as different time windows for treatment initiation after infarct onset. This review will discuss these aspects based on the results of the recent stroke recovery trials with the goal to contribute to the currently biggest unmet need in stroke research - the development of a recovery enhancing therapy that improves the functional outcome of a chronic stroke patient.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.