Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37736015›Full record

ReviewAPL bioengineering2023

Generation of direct current electrical fields as regenerative therapy for spinal cord injury: A review.

Lukas Matter, Bruce Harland, Brad Raos, Darren Svirskis, Maria Asplund

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in APL bioengineering, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. 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

5 authors.

Bruce HarlandSchool of Pharmacy, The University of Auckland, NZ 1023 Auckland, New Zealand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1199-136X
Brad RaosSchool of Pharmacy, The University of Auckland, NZ 1023 Auckland, New Zealand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8298-1700
Darren SvirskisSchool of Pharmacy, The University of Auckland, NZ 1023 Auckland, New Zealand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9435-1773

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Electrical stimulation (ES) shows promise as a therapy to promote recovery and regeneration after spinal cord injury. ES therapy establishes beneficial electric fields (EFs) and has been investigated in numerous studies, which date back nearly a century. In this review, we discuss the various engineering approaches available to generate regenerative EFs through direct current electrical stimulation and very low frequency electrical stimulation. We highlight the electrode-tissue interface, which is important for the appropriate choice of electrode material and stimulator circuitry. We discuss how to best estimate and control the generated field, which is an important measure for comparability of studies. Finally, we assess the methods used in these studies to measure functional recovery after the injury and treatment. This work reviews studies in the field of ES therapy with the goal of supporting decisions regarding best stimulation strategy and recovery assessment for future work.

Identifiers

PMID37736015
PMCPMC10511262

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.