Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33671617›Full record

ReviewPolymers2021

A Bibliometric Analysis of the Global Trend of Using Alginate, Gelatine, and Hydroxyapatite for Bone Tissue Regeneration Applications.

Mohamed Saiful Firdaus Hussin, Aludin Mohd Serah, Khairul Azri Azlan, Hasan Zuhudi Abdullah, Maizlinda Izwana Idris, Ihwan Ghazali, Amir Husni Mohd Shariff, Nurul Huda, Azrul Abidin Zakaria

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Polymers, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Horizon Scanning in Tissue Engineering Using Citation Network Analysis.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. 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

9 authors.

Mohamed Saiful Firdaus HussinFaculty of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering Technology, Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka, Durian Tunggal, Melaka 76100, Malaysia.ORCID 0000-0002-0734-8806
Aludin Mohd SerahFaculty of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering Technology, Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka, Durian Tunggal, Melaka 76100, Malaysia.
Khairul Azri AzlanFaculty of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering Technology, Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka, Durian Tunggal, Melaka 76100, Malaysia.
Hasan Zuhudi AbdullahFaculty of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, Batu Pahat, Johor 86400, Malaysia.
Maizlinda Izwana IdrisFaculty of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, Batu Pahat, Johor 86400, Malaysia.
Ihwan GhazaliFaculty of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering Technology, Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka, Durian Tunggal, Melaka 76100, Malaysia.ORCID 0000-0002-2720-5028
Amir Husni Mohd ShariffFaculty of Food Science and Nutrition, Universiti Malaysia Sabah, Kota Kinabalu, Sabah 88400, Malaysia.
Nurul HudaFaculty of Food Science and Nutrition, Universiti Malaysia Sabah, Kota Kinabalu, Sabah 88400, Malaysia.ORCID 0000-0001-9867-6401
Azrul Abidin ZakariaDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Universiti Tenaga Nasional, Kajang, Selangor 43000, Malaysia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Collecting information from previous investigations and expressing it in a scientometrics study can be a priceless guide to getting a complete overview of a specific research area. The aim of this study is to explore the interrelated connection between alginate, gelatine, and hydroxyapatite within the scope of bone tissue and scaffold. A review of traditional literature with data mining procedures using bibliometric analyses was considered to identify the evolution of the selected research area between 2009 and 2019. Bibliometric methods and knowledge visualization technologies were implemented to investigate diverse publications based on the following indicators: year of publication, document type, language, country, institution, author, journal, keyword, and number of citations. An analysis using a bibliometric study found that 7446 papers were located with the keywords "bone tissue" and "scaffold", and 1767 (alginate), 185 (gelatine), 5658 (hydroxyapatite) papers with those specific sub keywords. The number of publications that relate to "tissue engineering" and bone more than doubled between 2009 (1352) and 2019 (2839). China, the United States and India are the most productive countries, while Sichuan University and the Chinese Academy of Science from China are the most important institutions related to bone tissue scaffold. Materials Science and Engineering C is the most productive journal, followed by the Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A. This paper is a starting point, providing the first bibliometric analysis study of bone tissue and scaffold considering alginate, gelatine and hydroxyapatite. A bibliometric analysis would greatly assist in giving a scientific insight to support desired future research work, not only associated with bone tissue engineering applications. It is expected that the analysis of alginate, gelatine and hydroxyapatite in terms of 3D bioprinting, clinical outcomes, scaffold architecture, and the regenerative medicine approach will enhance the research into bone tissue engineering in the near future. Continued studies into these research fields are highly recommended.

Indexed as

alginatebone tissuegelatinehydroxyapatitescaffold

Identifiers

PMID33671617
PMCPMC7927100

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.