ReviewTranslational pediatrics2026
Regenerative medicine approaches for children with cerebral palsy: a systematic review of clinical safety and effectiveness.
Review in Translational pediatrics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cerebral palsy (CP) is a leading cause of childhood disability, and current interventions limited to symptomatic management. Regenerative medicine has been proposed as a promising to enhance neuroplasticity and improve outcomes. This systematic review aimed to synthesize clinical evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of regenerative medicine interventions in children with CP. Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and ScienceDirect [2010-2025] identified studies evaluating regenerative therapies in pediatric CP. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), interventional studies, cohort studies, and case series ≥3 participants. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB-2 and ROBINS-I. Due to heterogeneity, findings were synthesized narratively. Results: Eighteen studies including 1,087 children were analyzed. Most interventions involved umbilical cord (UC)-derived products (73%), followed by bone marrow-derived cellular therapies and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor-based protocols. Cord-derived therapies demonstrated moderate improvements in motor outcomes in selected trials, combination therapies (cord blood with erythropoietin) demonstrated the greatest motor and cognitive gains, while bone marrow approaches showed more variable effects. Adverse events were primarily mild and transient; however, long-term safety data were limited. Conclusions: Regenerative medicine represents a promising adjunctive strategy for treating CP in children, particularly with regard to products derived from UC blood. However, the variability in study design, small sample sizes, and short follow-up periods limit the possibility of drawing definitive conclusions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.