Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29026647›Full record

ReviewRegenerative biomaterials2017

Progress in development of bioderived materials for dermal wound healing.

Lin-Cui Da, Yi-Zhou Huang, Hui-Qi Xie

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Regenerative biomaterials, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Sprayed PAA-CaORegenerative biomaterials · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Chitosan hydrogel/silk fibroin/Mg(OH)Scientific reports · 2021
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

3 authors.

Lin-Cui DaLaboratory of Stem Cell and Tissue Engineering, State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, People's Republic of China.
Yi-Zhou HuangLaboratory of Stem Cell and Tissue Engineering, State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, People's Republic of China.
Hui-Qi XieLaboratory of Stem Cell and Tissue Engineering, State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, People's Republic of China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Treatment of acute and chronic wounds is one of the primary challenges faced by doctors. Bioderived materials have significant potential clinical value in tissue injury treatment and defect reconstruction. Various strategies, including drug loading, addition of metallic element(s), cross-linking and combining two or more distinct types of materials with complementary features, have been used to synthesize more suitable materials for wound healing. In this review, we describe the recent developments made in the processing of bioderived materials employed for cutaneous wound healing, including newly developed materials such as keratin and soy protein. The focus was on the key properties of the bioderived materials that have shown great promise in improving wound healing, restoration and reconstruction. With their good biocompatibility, nontoxic catabolites, microinflammation characteristics, as well as their ability to induce tissue regeneration and reparation, the bioderived materials have great potential for skin tissue repair.

Indexed as

acellular matrixbioderived materialstissue-engineered skinwound healing

Identifiers

PMID29026647
PMCPMC5633688

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.