Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34883564›Full record

ReviewPolymers2021

Modelling of Stem Cells Microenvironment Using Carbon-Based Scaffold for Tissue Engineering Application-A Review.

Vieralynda Vitus, Fatimah Ibrahim, Wan Safwani Wan Kamarul Zaman

Open access · goldAbstract 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 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 32% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Vieralynda VitusDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur 50603, Malaysia.
Fatimah IbrahimDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur 50603, Malaysia.
Wan Safwani Wan Kamarul ZamanDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur 50603, Malaysia.
University of Malaya · MY

Funding

University of Malaya GPF039A-2019, IIRG007A-19HWB & IIRG 007B-19HWB
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A scaffold is a crucial biological substitute designed to aid the treatment of damaged tissue caused by trauma and disease. Various scaffolds are developed with different materials, known as biomaterials, and have shown to be a potential tool to facilitate in vitro cell growth, proliferation, and differentiation. Among the materials studied, carbon materials are potential biomaterials that can be used to develop scaffolds for cell growth. Recently, many researchers have attempted to build a scaffold following the origin of the tissue cell by mimicking the pattern of their extracellular matrix (ECM). In addition, extensive studies were performed on the various parameters that could influence cell behaviour. Previous studies have shown that various factors should be considered in scaffold production, including the porosity, pore size, topography, mechanical properties, wettability, and electroconductivity, which are essential in facilitating cellular response on the scaffold. These interferential factors will help determine the appropriate architecture of the carbon-based scaffold, influencing stem cell (SC) response. Hence, this paper reviews the potential of carbon as a biomaterial for scaffold development. This paper also discusses several crucial factors that can influence the feasibility of the carbon-based scaffold architecture in supporting the efficacy and viability of SCs.

Indexed as

biomaterialbiophysical factorscarbon-basedscaffoldstem cellstissue engineering

Identifiers

PMID34883564
PMCPMC8658938
OpenAlexW3217165251

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.