SynthesisBrain and behavior2023
Efficacy of polyarginine peptides in the treatment of stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Brain and behavior, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of polyarginine peptides in the treatment of stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Brain and behavior · 2023Pooled it
- Effectiveness of Pulse Intravenous Infusion of Methylprednisolone on Pain in Patients with Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Anesthesiology and pain medicine · 2024Article
- Relationship Between Pain and Disability Among Stroke Patients.Anesthesiology and pain medicine · 2023Article
- Prevalence of Hemiplegic Shoulder Pain in Iran: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Anesthesiology and pain medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDisparities exist regarding an efficient treatment for stroke. Polyarginines have shown promising neuroprotective properties based on available published studies. Thus, the present study aims to systemically review and analyze existing evidence regarding polyarginine's administration efficacy in animal stroke models.
methodMedline, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science were systematically searched, in addition to manual search. Inclusion criteria were administrating polyarginine peptides in stroke animal models. Exclusion criteria were previous polyarginine administration, lacking a control group, review articles, and case reports. Data were collected and analyzed using STATA 17.0; a pooled standardized mean difference (SMD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI), meta-regression, and subgroup analyses were presented. Risk of bias, publication bias, and level of evidence were assessed using SYRCLE's tool, Egger's analysis, and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework, respectively.
resultsFrom the 468 searched articles, 11 articles were included. Analyses showed that R18 significantly decreases infarct size (SMD = -0.65; 95% CI: -1.01, -0.29) and brain edema (SMD = -1.90; 95% CI: -3.28, -0.51) and improves neurological outcome (SMD = 0.67; 95% CI: 0.44, 0.91) and functional status (SMD = 0.55; 95% CI: 0.26, 0.85) in stroke animal models. Moreover, R18D significantly decreases infarct size (SMD = -0.75; 95% CI: -1.17, -0.33) and improves neurological outcome (SMD = 0.46; 95% CI: 0.06, 0.86) and functional status (SMD = 0.35; 95% CI: 0.16, 0.54) in stroke models.
conclusionModerate level of evidence demonstrated that both R18 and R18D administration can significantly improve stroke outcomes in animal stroke models. However, considering the limitations, further pre-clinical and clinical studies are warranted to substantiate the neuroprotective efficacy of polyarginines for stroke.
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.