ReviewBiomedicines2022
Modeling Central Nervous System Injury In Vitro: Current Status and Promising Future Strategies.
Review in Biomedicines, 2022. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Modulation of miRNAs by Phytochemicals in Cerebral Ischemia: A Systematic Review of In Vitro and In Vivo Studies.Phytotherapy research : PTR · 2025Pooled it
- Targeting Peptidylarginine Deiminases in Neurons and Astrocytes in Central Nervous System Injury-Effects of Pan-PAD Inhibitor Cl-Amidine in an Oxygen-Glucose Deprivation Model of Ischaemia (OGD/R) and LPS Stimulation In Vitro.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- A Programmable, 3D Neuron-On-Chip Platform Integrating Near Real-Time Biosensing and Multiaxial Loading for Mechanobiological Injury Profiling.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- 3DMaterials today. Bio · 2025Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The central nervous system (CNS) injury, which occurs because of mechanical trauma or ischemia/hypoxia, is one of the main causes of mortality and morbidity in the modern society. Until know, despite the fact that numerous preclinical and clinical studies have been undertaken, no significant neuroprotective strategies have been discovered that could be used in the brain trauma or ischemia treatment. Although there are many potential explanations for the failure of those studies, it is clear that there are questions regarding the use of experimental models, both in vivo and in vitro, when studying CNS injury and searching new therapeutics. Due to some ethical issues with the use of live animals in biomedical research, implementation of experimental strategies that prioritize the use of cells and tissues in the in vitro environment has been encouraged. In this review, we examined some of the most commonly used in vitro models and the most frequently utilized cellular platforms in the research of traumatic brain injury and cerebral ischemia. We also proposed some future strategies that could improve the usefulness of these studies for better bench-to-bedside translational outcomes.
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.