ReviewBasic and clinical neuroscience
Effectiveness of Platelet-rich Plasma in Treating Spinal Cord Injuries: A Systematic Review & Meta-analysis.
Review in Basic and clinical neuroscience. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Platelet-rich plasma in the treatment of spinal cord injury: Mechanisms, efficacy, and clinical translation.Regenerative therapy · 2026Review
- Development and characterization of gelatin-platelet-rich plasma hydrogels for enhanced spinal cord injury repair.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- PRP-related biomaterials enhance bone and nerve repair.Materials today. Bio · 2026Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The present systematic review and meta-analysis was designed to investigate platelet-rich plasma (PRP) as an effective treatment for spinal cord injury in animal models. Methods: An extensive literature search was conducted using electronic databases. The included studies were summarized based on the investigated outcomes, including functional recovery and cavity size. Data were recorded as Mean±SD. The relationships between variables and the outcomes were investigated based on the "meta" command in the STATA 17.0 statistical program. Results: In total, 9 articles were included in the present meta-analysis. Pooled data analysis showed that administrating PRP significantly improved the motor function of animals (standardized mean differences [SMD]=1.5; 95% CI, 0.9%, 2.1%; P<0.0001). In subgroup analysis based on the severity of the injury, PRP administration significantly improved the motor function of animals in both moderate (SMD=2.59; 95% CI, 1.59%, 3.59%; P<0.0001; I Conclusion: This meta-analysis shows that PRP can significantly improve motor function and reduce the cavity size in animals with moderate to severe spinal cord injuries.
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.