ReviewMethods (San Diego, Calif.)2015
Infected animal models for tissue engineering.
Review in Methods (San Diego, Calif.), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Surface Topography Steer Soft Tissue Response and Antibacterial Function at the Transmucosal Region of Titanium Implant.International journal of nanomedicine · 2024Review
- Male or female sex: considerations and translational aspects in diabetic foot ulcer research using rodent models.Molecular and cellular biochemistry · 2023Review
- Contamination of wounds with fecal bacteria in immuno-suppressed mice.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- A murine model of cutaneous aspergillosis for evaluation of biomaterials-based local delivery therapies.Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A · 2019Article
- Development and Characterization of a Rabbit Model of Compromised Maxillofacial Wound Healing.Tissue engineering. Part C, Methods · 2019Article
- Drug delivery and tissue engineering to promote wound healing in the immunocompromised host: Current challenges and future directions.Advanced drug delivery reviews · 2018Review
- A composite critical-size rabbit mandibular defect for evaluation of craniofacial tissue regeneration.Nature protocols · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Infection is one of the most common complications associated with medical interventions and implants. As tissue engineering strategies to replace missing or damaged tissue advance, the focus on prevention and treatment of concomitant infection has also begun to emerge as an important area of research. Because the in vivo environment is a complex interaction between host tissue, implanted materials, and native immune system that cannot be replicated in vitro, animal models of infection are integral in evaluating the safety and efficacy of experimental treatments for infection. In this review, considerations for selecting an animal model, established models of infection, and areas that require further model development are discussed with regard to cutaneous, fascial, and orthopedic infections.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.