Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25937289›Full record

ReviewTrends in biotechnology2015

Strategies for improving the physiological relevance of human engineered tissues.

Rosalyn D Abbott, David L Kaplan

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Trends in biotechnology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Supercooled preservation of cultured primary rat hepatocyte monolayers.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. 3D cancer models: One step closer toFrontiers in immunology · 2023
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Engineering Three-Dimensional Vascularized Cardiac Tissues.Tissue engineering. Part B, Reviews · 2022
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  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.

Rosalyn D AbbottDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Science and Technology Center, Tufts University, 4 Colby Street, Medford, MA 02155, USA.
David L KaplanDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Science and Technology Center, Tufts University, 4 Colby Street, Medford, MA 02155, USA. Electronic address: david.kaplan@tufts.edu.

Funding

Translational Bioreactors - Engineering Complex TissuesP41EB002520 · NIBIB · TUFTS UNIVERSITY MEDFORD · PI KAPLAN, DAVID L. · 2004 to 2018
$16.7M
NIBIB NIH HHS P41 EB002520
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review examines important robust methods for sustained, steady-state, in vitro culture. To achieve 'physiologically relevant' tissues in vitro additional complexity must be introduced to provide suitable transport, cell signaling, and matrix support for cells in 3D environments to achieve stable readouts of tissue function. Most tissue engineering systems draw conclusions on tissue functions such as responses to toxins, nutrition, or drugs based on short-term outcomes with in vitro cultures (2-14 days). However, short-term cultures limit insight with physiological relevance because the cells and tissues have not reached a steady-state.

Indexed as

BioreactorsCell Culture TechniquesTissue EngineeringAnimalsHumansMice2D culture3D culturebioreactorslong-term culturemicrofluidicstissue engineering

Identifiers

PMID25937289
PMCPMC4475434

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.