Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33194169›Full record

ReviewJournal of tissue engineering

Evolving applications of the egg: chorioallantoic membrane assay and

Karen M Marshall, Janos M Kanczler, Richard Oc Oreffo

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of tissue engineering. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing 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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. RSC advances · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. APL bioengineering · 2024
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. ACS nano · 2021
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Extending the Applicability ofFrontiers in oncology · 2021
    Article
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.

Karen M MarshallBone and Joint Research Group, Centre for Human Development, Stem Cells and Regeneration, Institute of Developmental Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6809-9807
Janos M KanczlerBone and Joint Research Group, Centre for Human Development, Stem Cells and Regeneration, Institute of Developmental Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Richard Oc OreffoBone and Joint Research Group, Centre for Human Development, Stem Cells and Regeneration, Institute of Developmental Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/R015651/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The chick chorioallantoic membrane model has been around for over a century, applied in angiogenic, oncology, dental and xenograft research. Despite its often perceived archaic, redolent history, the chorioallantoic membrane assay offers new and exciting opportunities for material and growth factor evaluation in bone tissue engineering. Currently, superior/improved experimental methodology for the chorioallantoic membrane assay are difficult to identify, given an absence of scientific consensus in defining experimental approaches, including timing of inoculation with materials and the analysis of results. In addition, critically, regulatory and welfare issues impact upon experimental designs. Given such disparate points, this review details recent research using the

Indexed as

angiogenesisBone tissue engineeringCAM assaychorioallantoic membranein vivo

Identifiers

PMID33194169
PMCPMC7594486

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.