Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29550962›Full record

ReviewCurrent rheumatology reports2018

Macrophages, Wound Healing, and Fibrosis: Recent Insights.

Kate S Smigiel, William C Parks

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current rheumatology reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 103 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
103citing 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

103 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Scar wars: the viral menace.American journal of physiology. Lung cellular and molecular physiology · 2025
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

43 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

2 authors.

Kate S SmigielWomen's Guild Lung Institute, Departments of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, 8700 Beverly Blvd, Los Angeles, CA, 90048, USA.
William C ParksWomen's Guild Lung Institute, Departments of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, 8700 Beverly Blvd, Los Angeles, CA, 90048, USA. bill.parks@cshs.org.

Funding

Control of Macrophage Activation in Lung DiseaseR01HL141078 · NHLBI · CEDARS-SINAI MEDICAL CENTER · PI PARKS, WILLIAM C · 2018 to 2021
$2.4M
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL141078
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewMacrophages are central players in the immune response following tissue injury. These cells perform many functions, and the changing tissue microenvironment during injury shapes macrophage phenotype down a variety of polarized pathways. This review summarizes the current knowledge on the roles of macrophages during different stages of tissue injury, repair, and-if repair is not achieved-fibrosis. RECENT

findingsMacrophages present early in inflammation are functionally distinct from those at later stages. The predominant macrophage phenotype must transition from pro-inflammatory to pro-reparative to facilitate wound healing and scar resolution. If macrophages fail to acquire a tissue-healing phenotype, dysregulated signals can be drivers of disease processes, such as sustained, exuberant inflammation-as occurs in arthropathies-and fibrosis. Comprehensive understanding of the roles of specific macrophage populations at different stages of the repair process will support the development of immune-targeted therapies for diseases such as fibrosis.

Indexed as

FibrosisHumansInflammationMacrophage ActivationMacrophagesWound HealingFibrosisImmunosuppressionLeukocyteMacrophageScarringWound repair

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.