ReviewHeliyon2020
Development prospects of curable osteoplastic materials in dentistry and maxillofacial surgery.
Review in Heliyon, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Applications of DNA Hydrogels in Osteoporotic Bone Defects.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Review
- Enhancing Radiopacity and Antibacterial Activity of Osteogenic Calcium Silicate Cement by Incorporating Strontium.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025Article
- Bone Cements Used for Hip Prosthesis Fixation: The Influence of the Handling Procedures on Functional Properties Observed during In Vitro Study.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Natural Polymers for the Maintenance of Oral Health: Review of Recent Advances and Perspectives.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- Advantages of Hyaluronic Acid and Its Combination with Other Bioactive Ingredients in Cosmeceuticals.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Preparation of Alginate-Based Biomaterials and Their Applications in Biomedicine.Marine drugs · 2021Review
- Influence of the Degree of Deacetylation of Chitosan and BMP-2 Concentration on Biocompatibility and Osteogenic Properties of BMP-2/PLA Granule-Loaded Chitosan/β-Glycerophosphate Hydrogels.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The article presents classification of the thermosetting materials for bone augmentation. The physical, mechanical, biological, and clinical properties of such materials are reviewed. There are two main types of curable osteoplastic materials: bone cements and hydrogels. Compared to hydrogels, bone cements have high strength features, but their biological properties are not ideal and must be improved. Hydrogels are biocompatible and closely mimic the extracellular matrix. They can be used as cytocompatible scaffolds for tissue engineering, as can protein- and nucleic acid-activated structures. Hydrogels may be impregnated with osteoinductors such as proteins and genetic vectors without conformational changes. However, the mechanical properties of hydrogels limit their use for load-bearing bone defects. Thus, improving the strength properties of hydrogels is one of the possible strategies to achieve the basis for an ideal osteoplastic material.
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.