Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19135488›Full record

ReviewAdvanced drug delivery reviews2009

Mathematical modeling of molecular diffusion through mucus.

Yen Cu, W Mark Saltzman

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Advanced drug delivery reviews, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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

46 citing papers in PubMed, 125 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Mitigating Mucoadhesion of β-Cyclodextrins via PEGylation: Insights fromInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Drug and therapeutic intravaginal delivery targeting diseases in the female reproductive tract: A mathematical modeling perspective.Journal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society · 2025
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Yen CuDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06511, USA.
W Mark Saltzman
Yale University · US

Funding

Molecular and Cellular Transport in MucusR01EB000487 · NIBIB · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI IWASAKI, AKIKO, SALTZMAN, W. MARK · 2002 to 2019
$5.0M
MOLECULAR AND CELLULAR TRANSPORT IN MUCUSR01GM043873 · NIGMS · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI SALTZMAN, W MARK · 1990 to 2001
$581k
NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB000487NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM043873
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The rate of molecular transport through the mucus gel can be an important determinant of efficacy for therapeutic agents delivered by oral, intranasal, intravaginal/rectal, and intraocular routes. Transport through mucus can be described by mathematical models based on principles of physical chemistry and known characteristics of the mucus gel, its constituents, and of the drug itself. In this paper, we review mathematical models of molecular diffusion in mucus, as well as the techniques commonly used to measure diffusion of solutes in the mucus gel, mucus gel mimics, and mucosal epithelia.

Indexed as

Models, TheoreticalAnimalsChemical PhenomenaDiffusionHumansMacromolecular SubstancesModels, BiologicalMucusViscosityMacromolecular Substances

Identifiers

PMID19135488
PMCPMC2646819
OpenAlexW2004370748

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.