Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31754598›Full record

ReviewJournal of oral biology and craniofacial research

Polycaprolactone as biomaterial for bone scaffolds: Review of literature.

Ruby Dwivedi, Sumit Kumar, Rahul Pandey, Aman Mahajan, Deepti Nandana, Dhirendra S Katti, Divya Mehrotra

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of oral biology and craniofacial research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 239 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
239citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

239 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Microbial plastic degradation: enzymes, pathways, challenges, and perspectives.Microbiology and molecular biology reviews : MMBR · 2025
    Review
  20. Article

179 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

7 authors.

Ruby DwivediDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dental Sciences, KGMU, Lucknow, UP, India.
Sumit KumarDHR-MRU, Faculty of Dental Sciences, KGMU, Lucknow, UP, India.
Rahul PandeyDHR-MRU, Faculty of Dental Sciences, KGMU, Lucknow, UP, India.
Aman MahajanDepartment of Biological Sciences and Bioengineering, IIT Kanpur, UP, India.
Deepti NandanaDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dental Sciences, KGMU, Lucknow, UP, India.
Dhirendra S KattiDepartment of Biological Sciences and Bioengineering, IIT Kanpur, UP, India.
Divya MehrotraDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dental Sciences, KGMU, Lucknow, UP, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bone tissue engineering using polymer based scaffolds have been studied a lot in last decades. Considering the qualities of all the polymers desired to be used as scaffolds, Polycaprolactone (PCL) polyester apart from being biocompatible and biodegradable qualifies to an appreciable level due its easy availability, cost efficacy and suitability for modification. Its adjustable physio-chemical state, biological properties and mechanical strength renders it to withstand physical, chemical and mechanical, insults without significant loss of its properties. This review aims to critically analyse the efficacy of PCL as a biomaterial for bone scaffolds.

Indexed as

Bone tissue engineeringPolycaprolactoneScaffolds

Identifiers

PMID31754598
PMCPMC6854079

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.