Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30572957›Full record

ReviewJournal of biomedical science2018

Current and novel polymeric biomaterials for neural tissue engineering.

Rossana Boni, Azam Ali, Amin Shavandi, Andrew N Clarkson

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of biomedical science, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 137 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
137citing 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

137 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. 3DMaterials today. Bio · 2025
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Aerosol Jet Printing for Neuroprosthetic Device Development.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Engineering the Immune Response to Biomaterials.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review

77 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

4 authors.

Rossana BoniBioengineering Research Team, Centre for Bioengineering and Nanomedicine, Department of Food Science, University of Otago, PO Box 56, Dunedin, 9054, New Zealand.
Azam AliBioengineering Research Team, Centre for Bioengineering and Nanomedicine, Department of Food Science, University of Otago, PO Box 56, Dunedin, 9054, New Zealand. azam.ali@otago.ac.nz.
Amin ShavandiBioengineering Research Team, Centre for Bioengineering and Nanomedicine, Department of Food Science, University of Otago, PO Box 56, Dunedin, 9054, New Zealand.
Andrew N ClarksonDepartment of Anatomy, Brain Health Research Centre and Brain Research New Zealand, University of Otago, PO Box 56, Dunedin, 9054, New Zealand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The nervous system is a crucial component of the body and damages to this system, either by of injury or disease, can result in serious or potentially lethal consequences. Restoring the damaged nervous system is a great challenge due to the complex physiology system and limited regenerative capacity.Polymers, either synthetic or natural in origin, have been extensively evaluated as a solution for restoring functions in damaged neural tissues. Polymers offer a wide range of versatility, in particular regarding shape and mechanical characteristics, and their biocompatibility is unmatched by other biomaterials, such as metals and ceramics. Several studies have shown that polymers can be shaped into suitable support structures, including nerve conduits, scaffolds, and electrospun matrices, capable of improving the regeneration of damaged neural tissues. In general, natural polymers offer the advantage of better biocompatibility and bioactivity, while synthetic or non-natural polymers have better mechanical properties and structural stability. Often, combinations of the two allow for the development of polymeric conduits able to mimic the native physiological environment of healthy neural tissues and, consequently, regulate cell behaviour and support the regeneration of injured nervous tissues.Currently, most of neural tissue engineering applications are in pre-clinical study, in particular for use in the central nervous system, however collagen polymer conduits aimed at regeneration of peripheral nerves have already been successfully tested in clinical trials.This review highlights different types of natural and synthetic polymers used in neural tissue engineering and their advantages and disadvantages for neural regeneration.

Indexed as

AnimalsHumansNerve RegenerationNerve TissuePolymersTissue EngineeringPolymersAxonal regenerationBiomaterialsNeural tissue engineeringNeuronal differentiationSynthetic and natural polymers

Identifiers

PMID30572957
PMCPMC6300901

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.