ReviewCureus2022
Epigenetic Influences on Wound Healing and Hypertrophic-Keloid Scarring: A Review for Basic Scientists and Clinicians.
Review in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mechanistic Pathways of Wound Healing: From Hemostasis to Scar-Free Regeneration.Cell biochemistry and function · 2026Review
- piR-hsa-022095 Drives Hypertrophic Scar Formation via KLF11-Dependent Fibroblast Proliferation.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- The role of vitamin C on the skin.South African family practice : official journal of the South African Academy of Family Practice/Primary Care · 2025Review
- The Causal Effect of Iron Traits on Risk of Hypertrophic Scarring: A Two-Sample Mendelian Randomization Study.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2025Article
- A Standardized Porcine Model for Partial-Thickness Wound Healing Studies: Design, Characterization, Model Validation, and Histological Insights.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Primary care physicians and dermatologists are challenged by patients affected by keloid or hypertrophic scarring resulting from accidental wounding, surgical incisions, tattooing, or "branding" procedures to demonstrate their association with a specific culture, fraternity, or cult. The dysregulated wound healing associated with keloids and hypertrophic scarring adversely affects genetically susceptible individuals, especially persons of color with Fitzpatrick Skin types IV-VI. Although the specific mechanisms of bulky hypertrophic/keloid scarring and its association with oxidative stress and inflammation remain unclear, the current knowledge base is sufficient to provide some guidance to health practitioners who must serve, treat, and counsel affected individuals. This review focuses on providing insight to healthcare professionals about the role of epigenetics, oxidative stress, poor local oxygenation, and its relationship to impaired wound healing. The goal is to promote further research on bulky hypertrophic and keloid scarring for its prevention and to develop evidence-based clinical guidelines for optimal treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.