Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24527328›Full record

ReviewAdvances in wound care2013

The Contribution of Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor Gamma to Cutaneous Wound Healing.

Andrew Leask

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Advances in wound care, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. The Mechanistic Role of PPARPPAR research · 2026
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. 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

1 author.

Andrew LeaskDepartments of Dentistry and Physiology and Pharmacology, University of Western Ontario , London, Canada .

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

significanceCutaneous tissue repair involves an initial inflammatory phase, followed by a fibroproliferative phase and finally by a resolution phase. Failure to initiate fibroblast recruitment during the fibroproliferative phase results in chronic wounds, whereas failure to terminate the fibroproliferative phase results in fibroproliferative disorders. Thus, understanding how to regulate the fibroproliferative phase of tissue repair is, therefore, of high clinical relevance. Controlling the rate of the fibroproliferative response is essential to promote proper wound repair. RECENT ADVANCES: (1) The myofibroblast is essential for mediating the fibroproliferative phase of tissue repair. (2) The potent profibrotic cytokine transforming growth factor beta (TGF-β) is a major CRITICAL ISSUES: An increasing body of evidence indicates that the transcription factor peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPAR-γ) plays a key FUTURE DIRECTIONS: The development of drugs to control the rate of the fibroproliferative response are clinically relevant. Controlling PPAR-γ activity may be useful for prevention of scarring as well as for promoting the closure of chronic wounds.

Identifiers

PMID24527328
PMCPMC3857145

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.