Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23109321›Full record

ReviewBirth defects research. Part C, Embryo today : reviews2012

Embryonic wound healing: a primer for engineering novel therapies for tissue repair.

Katherine E Degen, Robert G Gourdie

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Birth defects research. Part C, Embryo today : reviews, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Regenerative Medicine for Equine Musculoskeletal Diseases.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Calcium Signaling in Vertebrate Development and Its Role in Disease.International journal of molecular sciences · 2018
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Katherine E DegenSchool of Biomedical Engineering Science, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, USA.
Robert G Gourdie
Virginia Tech · US

Funding

PATTERNING OF GAP JUNCTION COUPLING IN DEVELOPING HEARTR01HL056728 · NHLBI · VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INST AND ST UNIV · PI GOURDIE, ROBERT G · 1997 to 2021
$5.6M
Restoration of Skin Structure and Function Post-WoundingR41AR053798 · NIAMS · XEQUEL BIO, INC. · PI GOURDIE, ROBERT G · 2006 to 2006
$152k
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL056728NIAMS NIH HHS R41 AR053798
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Scar is the default tissue repair used by the body in response to most injuries-a response that occurs in wounds ranging in seriousness from minor skin cuts to complete severance of the spinal cord. By contrast, before the third trimester of pregnancy embryonic mammals tend to heal without scarring due to a variety of mechanisms and factors that are uniquely in operation during development in utero. The goal of tissue engineering is to develop safe and clinically effective biological substitutes that restore, maintain, or improve tissue function in patients. This review provides a comparative overview of wound healing during development and maturation and seeks to provide a perspective on just how much the embryo may be able teach us in the engineering of new therapies for tissue repair.

Indexed as

Age FactorsAnimalsEmbryo, MammalianExtracellular MatrixFetusFibroblastsHumansIntercellular JunctionsIntercellular Signaling Peptides and ProteinsMammalsStem CellsTissue EngineeringWound HealingIntercellular Signaling Peptides and Proteins

Identifiers

PMID23109321
PMCPMC5113025
OpenAlexW2158288254

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.