Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27799831›Full record

ReviewClinical pharmacology : advances and applications2016

Skin models for the testing of transdermal drugs.

Eman Abd, Shereen A Yousef, Michael N Pastore, Krishna Telaprolu, Yousuf H Mohammed, Sarika Namjoshi, Jeffrey E Grice, Michael S Roberts

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical pharmacology : advances and applications, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 145 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
145citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Engineering in vitro vascular microsystems.Microsystems & nanoengineering · 2025
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

85 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

8 authors.

Eman AbdTranslational Research Institute, School of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane.
Shereen A YousefTranslational Research Institute, School of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane.
Michael N PastoreSchool of Pharmacy and Medical Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia.
Krishna TelaproluTranslational Research Institute, School of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane.
Yousuf H MohammedTranslational Research Institute, School of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane.
Sarika NamjoshiTranslational Research Institute, School of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane.
Jeffrey E GriceTranslational Research Institute, School of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane.
Michael S RobertsTranslational Research Institute, School of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane; School of Pharmacy and Medical Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The assessment of percutaneous permeation of molecules is a key step in the evaluation of dermal or transdermal delivery systems. If the drugs are intended for delivery to humans, the most appropriate setting in which to do the assessment is the in vivo human. However, this may not be possible for ethical, practical, or economic reasons, particularly in the early phases of development. It is thus necessary to find alternative methods using accessible and reproducible surrogates for in vivo human skin. A range of models has been developed, including ex vivo human skin, usually obtained from cadavers or plastic surgery patients, ex vivo animal skin, and artificial or reconstructed skin models. Increasingly, largely driven by regulatory authorities and industry, there is a focus on developing standardized techniques and protocols. With this comes the need to demonstrate that the surrogate models produce results that correlate with those from in vivo human studies and that they can be used to show bioequivalence of different topical products. This review discusses the alternative skin models that have been developed as surrogates for normal and diseased skin and examines the concepts of using model systems for in vitro-in vivo correlation and the demonstration of bioequivalence.

Indexed as

bioequivalencedermal deliveryex vivo skin modelspercutaneous permeationreconstructed skintransdermal

Identifiers

PMID27799831
PMCPMC5076797

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.