Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40307837›Full record

ReviewBMC biology2025

Blueprints for healing: central nervous system regeneration in zebrafish and neonatal mice.

Brianna R Cellini, Sreeparvathy Vayankara Edachola, Timothy D Faw, Valentina Cigliola

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. 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.

Brianna R CelliniDepartment of Psychology and Neuroscience, Duke University, Durham, NC, 27710, USA.
Sreeparvathy Vayankara EdacholaUniversité Côte d'Azur, CNRS, Inserm, iBV, Nice, France.
Timothy D FawDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Duke University, Durham, NC, 27710, USA.
Valentina CigliolaDepartment of Pharmacology, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA. valentina.cigliola@vanderbilt.edu.

Funding

Agence Nationale de la Recherche ANR-22-CPJ1-0045-01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In adult mammals, including humans, neurons, and axons in the brain and spinal cord are inherently incapable of regenerating after injury. Studies of animals with innate capacity for regeneration are providing valuable insights into the mechanisms driving tissue healing. The aim of this review is to summarize recent data on regeneration mechanisms in the brain and spinal cord of zebrafish and neonatal mice. We infer that elucidating these mechanisms and understanding how and why they are lost in adult mammals will contribute to the development of strategies to promote central nervous system regeneration.

Indexed as

Central Nervous SystemNerve RegenerationZebrafishAnimalsAnimals, NewbornBrainMiceSpinal CordBrainInjuryNeonatal miceRegenerationSpinal cordZebrafish

Identifiers

PMID40307837
PMCPMC12044871

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.