Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36467608›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in cellular neuroscience2022

Improving translatability of spinal cord injury research by including age as a demographic variable.

Andrew N Stewart, Linda A T Jones, John C Gensel

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in cellular neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Challenges in Translating Regenerative Therapies for Spinal Cord Injury.Topics in spinal cord injury rehabilitation · 2023
    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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Andrew N StewartDepartment of Physiology, College of Medicine, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, United States.
Linda A T JonesCenter for Outcomes and Measurement, Jefferson College of Rehabilitation Sciences, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
John C GenselDepartment of Physiology, College of Medicine, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, United States.
University of Kentucky · USThomas Jefferson University · US

Funding

The role of macrophage phenotype and age in spinal cord injuryR01NS091582 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY · PI GENSEL, JOHN C · 2015 to 2019
$1.6M
Role of Age on Anti-oxidant Defense in Spinal Cord Injury: Physiological Changes and InterventionF32NS111241 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY · PI STEWART, ANDREW NATHANIEL · 2019 to 2021
$161k
NINDS NIH HHS F32 NS111241NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS091582
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pre-clinical and clinical spinal cord injury (SCI) studies differ in study design, particularly in the demographic characteristics of the chosen population. In clinical study design, criteria such as such as motor scores, neurological level, and severity of injury are often key determinants for participant inclusion. Further, demographic variables in clinical trials often include individuals from a wide age range and typically include both sexes, albeit historically most cases of SCI occur in males. In contrast, pre-clinical SCI models predominately utilize young adult rodents and typically use only females. While it is often not feasible to power SCI clinical trials to test multi-variable designs such as contrasting different ages, recent pre-clinical findings in SCI animal models have emphasized the importance of considering age as a biological variable prior to human experiments. Emerging pre-clinical data have identified case examples of treatments that diverge in efficacy across different demographic variables and have elucidated several age-dependent effects in SCI. The extent to which these differing or diverging treatment responses manifest clinically can not only complicate statistical findings and trial interpretations but also may be predictive of worse outcomes in select clinical populations. This review highlights recent literature including age as a biological variable in pre-clinical studies and articulates the results with respect to implications for clinical trials. Based on emerging unpredictable treatment outcomes in older rodents, we argue for the importance of including age as a biological variable in pre-clinical animal models prior to clinical testing. We believe that careful analyses of how age interacts with SCI treatments and pathophysiology will help guide clinical trial design and may improve both the safety and outcomes of such important efforts.

Indexed as

neurotraumapre-clinical researchsecondary injurysex as a biological variabletranslation

Identifiers

PMID36467608
PMCPMC9714671
OpenAlexW4309608553

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.