Transplantation of neural stem cells, Schwann cells and olfactory ensheathing cells for spinal cord injury : A Web of Science-based literature analysis.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To identify global research trends in transplantation of neural stem cells, Schwann cells and olfactory ensheathing cells for spinal cord injury. DATA RETRIEVAL: We performed a bibliometric analysis of studies on transplantation of neural stem cells, Schwann cells and olfactory ensheathing cells for spinal cord injury published from 2002 to 2011 and retrieved from the Web of Science, using the key words spinal cord injury along with either neural stem cell, Schwann cell or olfactory ensheathing cell. INCLUSION CRITERIA: (a) peer-reviewed published articles on neural stem cells, Schwann cells or olfactory ensheathing cells for spinal cord injury indexed in the Web of Science; (b) original research articles, reviews, meeting abstracts, proceedings papers, book chapters, editorial materials and news items; and (c) published between 2002 and 2011. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: (a) articles that required manual searching or telephone access; (b) documents that were not published in the public domain; and (c) corrected papers. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: (1) Annual publication output, distribution by journal, distribution by institution and top-cited articles on neural stem cells; (2) annual publication output, distribution by journal, distribution by institution and top-cited articles on Schwann cells; (3) annual publication output, distribution by journal, distribution by institution and top-cited articles on olfactory ensheathing cells. RESULTS: This analysis, based on articles indexed in the Web of Science, identified several research trends among studies published over the past 10 years in transplantation of neural stem cells, Schwann cells and olfactory ensheathing cells for spinal cord injury. The number of publications increased over the 10-year period examined. Most papers appeared in journals with a focus on neurology, such as Journal of Neurotrauma, Experimental Neurology and Glia. Research institutes publishing on the use of neural stem cells to repair spinal cord injury were mostly in the USA and Canada. Those publishing on the use of Schwann cells were mostly in the USA and Canada as well. Those publishing on the use of olfactory ensheathing cells were mostly in the UK, the USA and Canada. CONCLUSION: On the basis of the large number of studies around the world, cell transplantation has proven to be the most promising therapeutic approach for spinal cord injury.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.041 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.226 | 0.226 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".