Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30406580›Full record

ReviewCurrent osteoporosis reports2018

In Vivo Osteocyte Mechanotransduction: Recent Developments and Future Directions.

Paige V Hinton, Susan M Rackard, Oran D Kennedy

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current osteoporosis reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Bone Development and Regeneration 2.0.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Article
  7. Biomedical materials (Bristol, England) · 2022
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
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.

Paige V HintonDepartment of Anatomy & Tissue Engineering Research Group, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, 123 St Stephens Green, Dublin 2, Ireland.
Susan M RackardSchool of Veterinary Medicine, Veterinary Science Centre, University College Dublin, Dublin 4, Ireland.
Oran D KennedyDepartment of Anatomy & Tissue Engineering Research Group, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, 123 St Stephens Green, Dublin 2, Ireland. orankennedy@rcsi.ie.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewMechanical loading is an essential stimulus for skeletal tissues. Osteocytes are primarily responsible for sensing mechanical stimuli in bone and for orchestrating subsequent responses. This is critical for maintaining homeostasis, and responding to injury/disease. The osteocyte mechanotransduction pathway, and the downstream effects it mediates, is highly complex. In vivo models have proved invaluable in understanding this process. This review summarizes the commonly used models, as well as more recently developed ones, and describes how they are used to address emerging questions in the field. RECENT

findingsMinimally invasive animal models can be used to determine mechanisms of osteocyte mechanotransduction, at the cell and molecular level, while simultaneously reducing potentially confounding responses such as inflammation/wound-healing. The details of osteocyte mechanotransduction in bone are gradually becoming clearer. In vivo model systems are a key tool in pursing this question. Advances in this field are explored and discussed in this review.

Indexed as

Stress, MechanicalAnimalsBone and BonesHumansMechanotransduction, CellularOsteocytesWeight-BearingIn vivoMechanical loadingMechanotransductionOsteocyte

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.