Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38803647›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in neurology2024

Neural regeneration in the human central nervous system-from understanding the underlying mechanisms to developing treatments. Where do we stand today?

Christopher Elnan Kvistad, Torbjørn Kråkenes, Sonia Gavasso, Lars Bø

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing 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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. CRISPR-Based Gene Therapy for Brain Disease.Molecular neurobiology · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

4 authors.

Christopher Elnan KvistadNeuro-SysMed, Department of Neurology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway.
Torbjørn KråkenesNeuro-SysMed, Department of Neurology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway.
Sonia GavassoNeuro-SysMed, Department of Neurology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway.
Lars BøNeuro-SysMed, Department of Neurology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mature neurons in the human central nervous system (CNS) fail to regenerate after injuries. This is a common denominator across different aetiologies, including multiple sclerosis, spinal cord injury and ischemic stroke. The lack of regeneration leads to permanent functional deficits with a substantial impact on patient quality of life, representing a significant socioeconomic burden worldwide. Great efforts have been made to decipher the responsible mechanisms and we now know that potent intra- and extracellular barriers prevent axonal repair. This knowledge has resulted in numerous clinical trials, aiming to promote neuroregeneration through different approaches. Here, we summarize the current understanding of the causes to the poor regeneration within the human CNS. We also review the results of the treatment attempts that have been translated into clinical trials so far.

Indexed as

central nervous injuryischemic strokemultiple sclerosisregenerationspinal cord injury

Identifiers

PMID38803647
PMCPMC11129638

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.