ReviewNanotechnology2017
Integrating three-dimensional printing and nanotechnology for musculoskeletal regeneration.
Review in Nanotechnology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Convergence of 3D Bioprinting and Nanotechnology in Tissue Engineering Scaffolds.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Effect of Hydroxyapatite Coating by Er: YAG Pulsed Laser Deposition on the Bone Formation Efficacy by Polycaprolactone Porous Scaffold.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
- The Development Tendency of 3D-Printed Bioceramic Scaffolds for Applications Ranging From Bone Tissue Regeneration to Bone Tumor Therapy.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2021Review
- Bioprinting: From Tissue and Organ Development toChemical reviews · 2020Review
- Chemistry from 3D printed objects.Nature reviews. Chemistry · 2019Article
- Use of Nanoparticles in Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2019Review
- Producing 3D Biomimetic Nanomaterials for Musculoskeletal System Regeneration.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The field of tissue engineering is advancing steadily, partly due to advancements in rapid prototyping technology. Even with increasing focus, successful complex tissue regeneration of vascularized bone, cartilage and the osteochondral interface remains largely illusive. This review examines current three-dimensional printing techniques and their application towards bone, cartilage and osteochondral regeneration. The importance of, and benefit to, nanomaterial integration is also highlighted with recent published examples. Early-stage successes and challenges of recent studies are discussed, with an outlook to future research in the related areas.
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.