Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36017082›Full record

ReviewBurns & trauma2022

Skin biomechanics: a potential therapeutic intervention target to reduce scarring.

Motaharesadat Hosseini, Jason Brown, Kiarash Khosrotehrani, Ardeshir Bayat, Abbas Shafiee

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Burns & trauma, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

38 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 55 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Multi-Axis Stretchable Zippers for Personalized Wound Healing.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Evidence Supporting Conservative Scar Management Interventions Following Burn Injury: A Review Article.Journal of burn care & research : official publication of the American Burn Association · 2025
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Motaharesadat HosseiniCentre for Biomedical Technologies, School of Mechanical, Medical and Process Engineering (MMPE), Faculty of Engineering, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD 4059, Australia.
Jason BrownHerston Biofabrication Institute, Metro North Hospital and Health Service, Brisbane, QLD 4029, Australia.
Kiarash KhosrotehraniThe University of Queensland Diamantina Institute, Translational Research Institute, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD 4102, Australia.
Ardeshir BayatCentre for Dermatology Research, NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre, Stopford Building, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PT, England, UK.
Abbas ShafieeHerston Biofabrication Institute, Metro North Hospital and Health Service, Brisbane, QLD 4029, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8885-9025
Queensland Health · AUQueensland University of Technology · AUTranslational Research Institute · AUUniversity of Cape Town · ZA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pathological scarring imposes a major clinical and social burden worldwide. Human cutaneous wounds are responsive to mechanical forces and convert mechanical cues to biochemical signals that eventually promote scarring. To understand the mechanotransduction pathways in cutaneous scarring and develop new mechanotherapy approaches to achieve optimal scarring, the current study highlights the mechanical behavior of unwounded and scarred skin as well as intra- and extracellular mechanisms behind keloid and hypertrophic scars. Additionally, the therapeutic interventions that promote optimal scar healing by mechanical means at the molecular, cellular or tissue level are extensively reviewed. The current literature highlights the significant role of fibroblasts in wound contraction and scar formation via differentiation into myofibroblasts. Thus, understanding myofibroblasts and their responses to mechanical loading allows the development of new scar therapeutics. A review of the current clinical and preclinical studies suggests that existing treatment strategies only reduce scarring on a small scale after wound closure and result in poor functional and aesthetic outcomes. Therefore, the perspective of mechanotherapies needs to consider the application of both mechanical forces and biochemical cues to achieve optimal scarring. Moreover, early intervention is critical in wound management; thus, mechanoregulation should be conducted during the healing process to avoid scar maturation. Future studies should either consider combining mechanical loading (pressure) therapies with tension offloading approaches for scar management or developing more effective early therapies based on contraction-blocking biomaterials for the prevention of pathological scarring.

Indexed as

Dermal fibrosisMechanotransductionPressure therapySkin biomechanicsTension therapyWound healing

Identifiers

PMID36017082
PMCPMC9398863
OpenAlexW4293024091

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.