ReviewNeurobiology of pain (Cambridge, Mass.)
Cellular models of pain: New technologies and their potential to progress preclinical research.
Review in Neurobiology of pain (Cambridge, Mass.). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Microglial MARCO facilitates Varicella zoster virus uptake and triggers TLR2-mediated neuroinflammation.Journal of biomedical science · 2026Article
- Article
- Decoding Pain: Next-Generation In Vitro Systems for Mechanistic Insights and Drug Discovery.FASEB journal : official publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology · 2025Review
- Pain research in a petri dish? Advantages and limitations of neuro-glial primary cell cultures from structures of the nociceptive system.Brain, behavior, & immunity - health · 2024Article
- Advancing Pain Understanding and Drug Discovery: Insights from Preclinical Models and Recent Research Findings.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Electrophysiological Analyses of Human Dorsal Root Ganglia and Human Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell-derived Sensory Neurons From Male and Female Donors.The journal of pain · 2024Article
- Measuring pain and nociception: Through the glasses of a computational scientist. Transdisciplinary overview of methods.Frontiers in network physiology · 2023Review
- Towards bridging the translational gap by improved modeling of human nociception in health and disease.Pflugers Archiv : European journal of physiology · 2022Review
- Modelling skeletal pain harnessing tissue engineering.In vitro models · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
In vitro models fill a vital niche in preclinical pain research, allowing detailed study of molecular pathways, and in the case of humanised systems, providing a translational bridge between in vivo animal models and human patients. Significant advances in cellular technology available to basic pain researchers have occurred in the last decade, including developing protocols to differentiate sensory neuron-like cells from stem cells and greater access to human dorsal root ganglion tissue. In this review, we discuss the use of both models in preclinical pain research: What can a human sensory neuron in a dish tell us that rodent in vivo models cannot? How similar are these models to their endogenous counterparts, and how should we judge them? What limitations do we need to consider? How can we leverage cell models to improve translational success? In vitro human sensory neuron models equip pain researchers with a valuable tool to investigate human nociception. With continual development, consideration for their advantages and limitations, and effective integration with other experimental strategies, they could become a driving force for the pain field's advancement.
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.