Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35299645›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2022

Recent Advances in Bioengineered Scaffolds for Cutaneous Wound Healing.

Jianghui Qin, Fang Chen, Pingli Wu, Guoming Sun

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing 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

52 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Optimization ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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.

Jianghui QinCollege of Chemistry and Environmental Science, Institute of Life Science and Green Development, Hebei University, Baoding, China.
Fang ChenAffiliated Hospital of Hebei University, College of Clinical Medicine, Institute of Life Science and Green Development, Hebei University, Baoding, China.
Pingli WuCollege of Chemistry and Environmental Science, Institute of Life Science and Green Development, Hebei University, Baoding, China.
Guoming SunAffiliated Hospital of Hebei University, College of Clinical Medicine, Institute of Life Science and Green Development, Hebei University, Baoding, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Wound healing is an evolved dynamic biological process. Though many research and clinical approaches have been explored to restore damaged or diseased skin, the current treatment for deep cutaneous injuries is far from being perfect, and the ideal regenerative therapy remains a significant challenge. Of all treatments, bioengineered scaffolds play a key role and represent great progress in wound repair and skin regeneration. In this review, we focus on the latest advancement in biomaterial scaffolds for wound healing. We discuss the emerging philosophy of designing biomaterial scaffolds, followed by precursor development. We pay particular attention to the therapeutic interventions of bioengineered scaffolds for cutaneous wound healing, and their dual effects while conjugating with bioactive molecules, stem cells, and even immunomodulation. As we review the advancement and the challenges of the current strategies, we also discuss the prospects of scaffold development for wound healing.

Indexed as

bioengineered scaffoldsbiomaterialspro-regenerativeskinwound healing

Identifiers

PMID35299645
PMCPMC8921732

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.