Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29470769›Full record

ReviewProgress in biomaterials2014

Advancement of wound care from grafts to bioengineered smart skin substitutes.

Robin Augustine, Nandakumar Kalarikkal, Sabu Thomas

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Progress in biomaterials, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing 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

32 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Innovative Hydrogel Design: Tailoring Immunomodulation for Optimal Chronic Wound Recovery.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Recent Advances in Bioengineered Scaffolds for Cutaneous Wound Healing.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Rational Design of Immunomodulatory Hydrogels for Chronic Wound Healing.Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.) · 2021
    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

3 authors.

Robin AugustineInternational and Interuniversity Centre for Nanoscience and Nanotechnology, Mahatma Gandhi University, Priyadarshini Hills P. O., Kottayam, 686 560, Kerala, India.
Nandakumar KalarikkalInternational and Interuniversity Centre for Nanoscience and Nanotechnology, Mahatma Gandhi University, Priyadarshini Hills P. O., Kottayam, 686 560, Kerala, India. nkkalarikkal@mgu.ac.in.
Sabu ThomasInternational and Interuniversity Centre for Nanoscience and Nanotechnology, Mahatma Gandhi University, Priyadarshini Hills P. O., Kottayam, 686 560, Kerala, India. sabupolymer@yahoo.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review gives a brief description on the skin and its essential functions, damages or injury which are common to the skin and the role of skin substitute to replace the functions of the skin soon after an injury. Skin substitutes have crucial role in the management of deep dermal and full thickness wounds. At present, there is no skin substitute in the market that can replace all the functions of skin 'and the research is still continuing for a better alternative. This review is an attempt to recollect and report the past efforts including skin grafting and recent trends like use of bioengineered smart skin substitutes in wound care. Incorporation functional moieties like antimicrobials and wound healing agents are also described.

Indexed as

AngiogenesisSkin graftsSkin substitutesSmart biomaterialsWound healing

Identifiers

PMID29470769
PMCPMC5299852

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.