ArticleACS applied bio materials2020
Biomimetic Nanofibrous 3D Materials for Craniofacial Bone Tissue Engineering.
Article in ACS applied bio materials, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- 3D-Printed Demineralized Bone Matrix-Based Conductive Scaffolds Combined with Electrical Stimulation for Bone Tissue Engineering Applications.ACS applied bio materials · 2024Article
- Biomimetic Therapeutics for Bone Regeneration: A Perspective on Antiaging Strategies.Macromolecular bioscience · 2024Review
- Dental-derived stem cells in tissue engineering: the role of biomaterials and host response.Regenerative biomaterials · 2024Review
- Electrospun polycaprolactone incorporated with fluorapatite nanoparticles composite scaffolds enhance healing of experimental calvarial defect on rats.Annals of translational medicine · 2023Article
- Solution-Based Processing for Scaffold Fabrication in Tissue Engineering Applications: A Brief Review.Polymers · 2021Review
- 3D PCL/Gelatin/Genipin Nanofiber Sponge as Scaffold for Regenerative Medicine.Materials (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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Repair of large bone defects using biomaterials-based strategies has been a significant challenge due to the complex characteristics required for tissue regeneration, especially in the craniofacial region. Tissue engineering strategies aimed at restoration of function face challenges in material selection, synthesis technique, and choice of bioactive factor release in combination with all aforementioned facets. Biomimetic nanofibrous (NF) scaffolds are attractive vehicles for tissue engineering due to their ability to promote endogenous bone regeneration by mimicking the shape and chemistry of natural bone extracellular matrix (ECM). To date, several techniques for generation of biomimetic NF scaffolds have been discovered, each possessing several advantages and drawbacks. This spotlight highlights two of the more popular techniques for biomimetic NF scaffold synthesis: electrospinning and thermally-induced phase separation (TIPS), covering development from inception in each technique as well as discussing the most recent innovations in each fabrication method.
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.