Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29748516›Full record

ReviewGenes2018

Journey into Bone Models: A Review.

Julia Scheinpflug, Moritz Pfeiffenberger, Alexandra Damerau, Franziska Schwarz, Martin Textor, Annemarie Lang, Frank Schulze

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Genes, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing 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

48 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Development of a Scaffold from the Cob ofJournal of functional biomaterials · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Recent Advances in Scaffolds for Guided Bone Regeneration.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

7 authors.

Julia ScheinpflugGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), German Centre for the Protection of Laboratory Animals (Bf3R),10589 Berlin, Germany. julia.scheinpflug@bfr.bund.de.
Moritz PfeiffenbergerCharité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin and Berlin Institute of Health, Department of Rheumatology and Clinical Immunology, 10117 Berlin, Germany. moritz.pfeiffenberger@charite.de.
Alexandra DamerauCharité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin and Berlin Institute of Health, Department of Rheumatology and Clinical Immunology, 10117 Berlin, Germany. alexandra.damerau@charite.de.
Franziska SchwarzGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), German Centre for the Protection of Laboratory Animals (Bf3R),10589 Berlin, Germany. franziskawschwarz@googlemail.com.
Martin TextorGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), German Centre for the Protection of Laboratory Animals (Bf3R),10589 Berlin, Germany. martin.textor@bfr.bund.de.
Annemarie LangCharité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin and Berlin Institute of Health, Department of Rheumatology and Clinical Immunology, 10117 Berlin, Germany. annemarie.lang@charite.de.
Frank SchulzeGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), German Centre for the Protection of Laboratory Animals (Bf3R),10589 Berlin, Germany. frank.schulze@bfr.bund.de.ORCID 0000-0003-1137-7148

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bone is a complex tissue with a variety of functions, such as providing mechanical stability for locomotion, protection of the inner organs, mineral homeostasis and haematopoiesis. To fulfil these diverse roles in the human body, bone consists of a multitude of different cells and an extracellular matrix that is mechanically stable, yet flexible at the same time. Unlike most tissues, bone is under constant renewal facilitated by a coordinated interaction of bone-forming and bone-resorbing cells. It is thus challenging to recreate bone in its complexity in vitro and most current models rather focus on certain aspects of bone biology that are of relevance for the research question addressed. In addition, animal models are still regarded as the gold-standard in the context of bone biology and pathology, especially for the development of novel treatment strategies. However, species-specific differences impede the translation of findings from animal models to humans. The current review summarizes and discusses the latest developments in bone tissue engineering and organoid culture including suitable cell sources, extracellular matrices and microfluidic bioreactor systems. With available technology in mind, a best possible bone model will be hypothesized. Furthermore, the future need and application of such a complex model will be discussed.

Indexed as

biomaterialsbioreactorsbonein vitro modelsorgan-on-a-chip

Identifiers

PMID29748516
PMCPMC5977187

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.