Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27857762›Full record

ReviewDental research journal2016

Scaffolds in regenerative endodontics: A review.

Kinjal M Gathani, Srinidhi Surya Raghavendra

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Dental research journal, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

50 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 121 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kinjal M GathaniDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Sinhgad Dental College and Hospital, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
Srinidhi Surya RaghavendraDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Sinhgad Dental College and Hospital, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
Sinhgad Dental College and Hospital · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Root canal therapy has enabled us to save numerous teeth over the years. The most desired outcome of endodontic treatment would be when diseased or nonvital pulp is replaced with healthy pulp tissue that would revitalize the teeth through regenerative endodontics. 'A search was conducted using the Pubmed and MEDLINE databases for articles with the criteria 'Platelet rich plasma', 'Platelet rich fibrin', 'Stem cells', 'Natural and artificial scaffolds' from 1982-2015'. Tissues are organized as three-dimensional structures, and appropriate scaffolding is necessary to provide a spatially correct position of cell location and regulate differentiation, proliferation, or metabolism of the stem cells. Extracellular matrix molecules control the differentiation of stem cells, and an appropriate scaffold might selectively bind and localize cells, contain growth factors, and undergo biodegradation over time. Different scaffolds facilitate the regeneration of different tissues. To ensure a successful regenerative procedure, it is essential to have a thorough and precise knowledge about the suitable scaffold for the required tissue. This article gives a review on the different scaffolds providing an insight into the new developmental approaches on the horizon.

Indexed as

Extracellular matrixpulpregenerationscaffolds

Identifiers

PMID27857762
PMCPMC5090995
OpenAlexW2528123585

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.