SynthesisFrontiers in neurology2022
Functional improvement in individuals with chronic spinal cord injury treated with 4-aminopyridine: A systematic review.
Synthesis in Frontiers in neurology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Combinatorial approaches increasing neuronal activity accelerate recovery after spinal cord injury.Brain : a journal of neurology · 2025Trial
- Research Progress on the Pyroptosis Mechanism and Related Active Ingredients of Natural Drugs in Spinal Cord Injury.International journal of general medicine · 2026Review
- Downmodulation of Potassium Conductances Induces Epileptic Seizures in Cortical Network Models Via Multiple Synergistic Factors.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025Article
- 4-Aminopyridine in pediatric traumatic spinal cord injury: A case report.The journal of spinal cord medicine · 2024Article
- Effect of Voltage-Gated KbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Study design: Systematic review. Objective: To provide current evidence on the efficacy of 4-aminopyridine (4-AP) to bring about functional improvement in individuals with chronic traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI). Methods: The Medline (PubMed), Web of Science and SCOPUS databases were systematically searched for relevant articles on the efficacy of 4-AP to treat SCI, from the dates such articles were first published until May 2022. Full-text versions of all the articles selected were examined independently by two reviewers. Methodological quality was rated using the Modified Jadad Scale, and risk of bias was assessed with the RoB-2 test. Data extracted included human models/types, PRISMA assessment protocols, and the results of each study. Descriptive syntheses are provided. Results: In total, 28 articles were initially identified, 10 of which were included after screening. Most of the studies reviewed reported some degree of patient improvement in one or more of the following parameters: motor, sensitivity and sexual function, sphincter control, spasticity, ability to function independently, quality of life, central motor conduction, pain, and pulmonary function. Conclusions: This review confirms the efficacy of 4-AP in improving several conditions resulting from SCI but further research on this topic is warranted. Additional randomized clinical trials with 4-AP involving larger sample sizes are needed, as are consistent outcome measures in order to obtain adequate data for analysis with a view to enhance treatment benefits. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=334835, PROSPERO CRD42022334835.
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.