ReviewNeural regeneration research2023
Simulating traumatic brain injury
Review in Neural regeneration research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- A 3D Human Neuron-on-Chip Platform to Monitor Neuronal Injury Responses.Advanced healthcare materials · 2026Article
- Evaluating Leucine, Isoleucine, and Valine Ratios in Mixed Cortical Cell Cultures Following Cortical Trauma: An In Vitro Assessment.International journal of translational medicine (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Dynamic Hydrogel-Based Strategy for Traumatic Brain Injury Modeling and Therapy.CNS neuroscience & therapeutics · 2025Review
- Emerging biomimetic biopolymer-based composites: advancing accessible and sustainable neural disease models and therapeutics.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Review
- Leveraging Biomaterial Platforms to Study Aging-Related Neural and Muscular Degeneration.Biomolecules · 2024Review
- Elucidating the neuroimmunology of traumatic brain injury: methodological approaches to unravel intercellular communication and function.Frontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Traumatic brain injuries are serious clinical incidents associated with some of the poorest outcomes in neurological practice. Coupled with the limited regenerative capacity of the brain, this has significant implications for patients, carers, and healthcare systems, and the requirement for life-long care in some cases. Clinical treatment currently focuses on limiting the initial neural damage with long-term care/support from multidisciplinary teams. Therapies targeting neuroprotection and neural regeneration are not currently available but are the focus of intensive research. Biomaterial-based interventions are gaining popularity for a range of applications including biomolecule and drug delivery, and to function as cellular scaffolds. Experimental investigations into the development of such novel therapeutics for traumatic brain injury will be critically underpinned by the availability of appropriate high throughput, facile, ethically viable, and pathomimetic biological model systems. This represents a significant challenge for researchers given the pathological complexity of traumatic brain injury. Specifically, there is a concerted post-injury response mounted by multiple neural cell types which includes microglial activation and astroglial scarring with the expression of a range of growth inhibitory molecules and cytokines in the lesion environment. Here, we review common models used for the study of traumatic brain injury (ranging from live animal models to in vitro systems), focusing on penetrating traumatic brain injury models. We discuss their relative advantages and drawbacks for the developmental testing of biomaterial-based therapies.
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.