ReviewInterface focus2016
Review on experiment-based two- and three-dimensional models for wound healing.
Review in Interface focus, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Physical models of embryonic epithelial healing.PLoS computational biology · 2026Review
- Start your engines: How migratory fibroblasts respond to and remember mechanical stretch.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- Theoretical perspective on synthetic man-made life: Learning from the origin of life.Quantitative biology (Beijing, China) · 2023Review
- Modeling and Parameter Subset Selection for Fibrin Polymerization Kinetics with Applications to Wound Healing.Bulletin of mathematical biology · 2021Article
- Junctional and cytoplasmic contributions in wound healing.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Traumatic and chronic wounds are a considerable medical challenge that affects many populations and their treatment is a monetary and time-consuming burden in an ageing society to the medical systems. Because wounds are very common and their treatment is so costly, approaches to reveal the responses of a specific wound type to different medical procedures and treatments could accelerate healing and reduce patient suffering. The effects of treatments can be forecast using mathematical modelling that has the predictive power to quantify the effects of induced changes to the wound-healing process. Wound healing involves a diverse and complex combination of biophysical and biomechanical processes. We review a wide variety of contemporary approaches of mathematical modelling of gap closure and wound-healing-related processes, such as angiogenesis. We provide examples of the understanding and insights that may be garnered using those models, and how those relate to experimental evidence. Mathematical modelling-based simulations can provide an important visualization tool that can be used for illustrational purposes for physicians, patients and researchers.
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.