Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26816620›Full record

ArticleRegenerative biomaterials2014

Nanofiber-microsphere (nano-micro) matrices for bone regenerative engineering: a convergence approach toward matrix design.

Clarke Nelson, Yusuf Khan, Cato T Laurencin

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Regenerative biomaterials, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Regenerative biomaterials · 2021
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Nanofiber/Microsphere Hybrid MatricesRegenerative engineering and translational medicine · 2018
    Article
  8. Regenerative Engineering of the Rotator Cuff of the Shoulder.ACS biomaterials science & engineering · 2018
    Article
  9. Microsphere-Based Scaffolds in Regenerative Engineering.Annual review of biomedical engineering · 2017
    Review
  10. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Clarke NelsonRaymond and Beverly Sackler Center for Biomedical, Biological, Physical and Engineering Sciences, Institute for Regenerative Engineering, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, CT 06030, USA, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, CT 06030, USA, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269, USA, Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269, USA.
Yusuf KhanRaymond and Beverly Sackler Center for Biomedical, Biological, Physical and Engineering Sciences, Institute for Regenerative Engineering, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, CT 06030, USA, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, CT 06030, USA, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269, USA, Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269, USA.
Cato T LaurencinRaymond and Beverly Sackler Center for Biomedical, Biological, Physical and Engineering Sciences, Institute for Regenerative Engineering, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, CT 06030, USA, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, CT 06030, USA, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269, USA, Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269, USA.
University of Connecticut · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bone is an essential organ for health and quality of life. Due to current shortfalls in therapy for bone tissue engineering, scientists have sought the application of synthetic materials as bone graft substitutes. As a composite organic/inorganic material with significant extra cellular matrix (ECM), one way to improve bone graft substitutes may be to engineer a synthetic matrix that is influenced by the physical appearance of natural ECM networks. In this work, the authors evaluate composite, hybrid scaffolds for bone tissue engineering based on composite ceramic/polymer microsphere scaffolds with synthetic ECM-mimetic networks in their pore spaces. Using thermally induced phase separation, nanoscale fibers were deposited in the pore spaces of structurally sound microsphere-based scaffold with a density proportionate to the initial polymer concentration. Porosimetry and mechanical testing indicated no significant changes in overall pore characteristics or mechanical integrity as a result of the fiber deposition process. These scaffolds displayed adequate mechanical integrity on the scale of human trabecular bone and supported the adhesion and proliferation of cultured mouse calvarial osteoblasts. Drawing from natural cues, these scaffolds may represent a new avenue forward for advanced bone tissue engineering scaffolds.

Indexed as

bioceramicsbonemedical devicenanobiomaterials

Identifiers

PMID26816620
PMCPMC4669008
OpenAlexW2143233249

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.