ArticleBioactive materials2018
Antibacterial forsterite (Mg
Article in Bioactive materials, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 68 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Article
- Advances in magnesium-containing bioceramics for bone repair.Biomaterials translational · 2024Review
- Fabrication and Characterization of Porous Diopside/Akermanite Ceramics with Prospective Tissue Engineering Applications.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Bioceramic-based scaffolds with antibacterial function for bone tissue engineering: A review.Bioactive materials · 2022Review
- Synthesis and Characterization of Porous Forsterite Ceramics with Prospective Tissue Engineering Applications.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Mechanical, Structural, and Biological Characteristics of Polylactide/Wollastonite 3D Printed Scaffolds.Polymers · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the current work, forsterite samples with different surface area were investigated for its antibacterial activity. Dissolution studies show that the lower degradation of forsterite compared to other silicate bioceramics, which is a desirable property for repairing bone defects. Forsterite scaffold shows superior compressive strength than the cortical bone after immersion in simulated body fluid. Bactericidal tests indicate that the forsterite had inhibition effect on the growth of clinical bacterial isolates. Forsterite may be a suitable candidate material for load bearing applications with enhanced mechanical properties and lower degradation rate.
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.