Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35218576›Full record

ReviewInternational endodontic journal2022

A critical analysis of research methods and biological experimental models to study pulp regeneration.

Vinicius Rosa, Gopu Sriram, Neville McDonald, Bruno Neves Cavalcanti

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International endodontic journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Cell homing within endodontic hydrogels: A scoping review.The Japanese dental science review · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Dentin Mechanobiology: Bridging the Gap between Architecture and Function.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Bioprinting and biomaterials for dental alveolar tissue regeneration.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2023
    Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
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

4 authors.

Vinicius RosaFaculty of Dentistry, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9203-7657
Gopu SriramFaculty of Dentistry, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8423-5197
Neville McDonaldDepartment of Cariology, Restorative Sciences and Endodontics, University of Michigan School of Dentistry, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Bruno Neves CavalcantiDepartment of Cariology, Restorative Sciences and Endodontics, University of Michigan School of Dentistry, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0455-4823

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With advances in knowledge and treatment options, pulp regeneration is now a clear objective in clinical dental practice. For this purpose, many methodologies have been developed in attempts to address the putative questions raised both in research and in clinical practice. In the first part of this review, laboratory-based methods will be presented, analysing the advantages, disadvantages, and benefits of cell culture methodologies and ectopic/semiorthotopic animal studies. This will also demonstrate the need for alignment between two-dimensional and three-dimensional laboratory techniques to accomplish the range of objectives in terms of cell responses and tissue differentiation. The second part will cover observations relating to orthotopic animal studies, describing the current models used for this purpose and how they contribute to the translation of regenerative techniques to the clinic.

Indexed as

Dental PulpRegenerationAnimalsCell Culture TechniquesCell DifferentiationModels, BiologicalTissue Engineeringanimal modelscell culturedental pulpdental pulp regenerationstem cells

Identifiers

PMID35218576
PMCPMC9311820

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.