Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35633843›Full record

ArticleBioactive materials2022

Evidence-based biomaterials research.

Kai Zhang, Bin Ma, Kaiyan Hu, Bo Yuan, Xin Sun, Xu Song, Zhonglan Tang, Hai Lin, Xiangdong Zhu, Yufeng Zheng and 4 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Bioactive materials, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Toward Sex-Specific Biomaterials Innovation: A Perspective.ACS biomaterials science & engineering · 2025
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Biomaterials for Drug Delivery and Human Applications.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  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

14 authors.

Kai ZhangInstitute of Regulatory Science for Medical Devices, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610064, PR China.
Bin MaEvidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, 730000, PR China.
Kaiyan HuEvidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, 730000, PR China.
Bo YuanNational Engineering Research Center for Biomaterials, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610064, PR China.
Xin SunChinese Evidence-based Medicine Centre, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, PR China.
Xu SongInstitute of Regulatory Science for Medical Devices, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610064, PR China.
Zhonglan TangInstitute of Regulatory Science for Medical Devices, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610064, PR China.
Hai LinNational Engineering Research Center for Biomaterials, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610064, PR China.
Xiangdong ZhuNational Engineering Research Center for Biomaterials, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610064, PR China.
Yufeng ZhengDepartment of Materials Science and Engineering, College of Engineering, Peking University, Beijing, 100871, PR China.
Andrés J GarcíaWoodruff School of Mechanical Engineering, Petit Institute for Bioengineering and Bioscience, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, 30332-0363, USA.
Antonios G MikosDepartments of Bioengineering, Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, Rice University, Houston, TX, 77251, USA.
James M AndersonDepartments of Pathology, Biomedical Engineering and Macromolecular Science and Engineering, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, 44106, USA.
Xingdong ZhangInstitute of Regulatory Science for Medical Devices, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610064, PR China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The fast development of biomaterials science and engineering has generated significant number of studies and publications as well as tremendous amount of research data. A methodology is needed to translate such research data and results to validated scientific evidence. This article for the first time proposes the concept and methodology of evidence-based biomaterials research, which is to use evidence-based research approach represented by systematic reviews to generate evidence for answering scientific questions related to biomaterials. After briefly introducing the advancement of biomaterials since 1950s, the scientific and engineering nature of biomaterials are discussed along with the roadmap of biomaterials translation from basic research to commercialized medical products, and the needs of scientific evidence. Key information of the evidence-based approach such as its origination from evidence-based medicine, levels of evidence, systematic review and meta-analysis, differences between systematic and narrative reviews is then highlighted. Applications with a step-by-step procedure of conducting evidence-based biomaterials research, three examples of biomaterials research using evidence-based approach to generate scientific evidence, and opportunities and challenges of evidence-based biomaterials research are presented. With its notable impact on the practice of medicine, the evidence-based approach is also expected to make influential contributions to the biomaterials field.

Indexed as

BiomaterialBiomaterials researchEvidence-based approachEvidence-based medicineMeta-analysisSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID35633843
PMCPMC9122837

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.