Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36143676›Full record

ReviewMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Designing a Biomaterial Approach to Control the Adaptive Response to a Skin Injury.

Dale Feldman

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

1 author.

Dale FeldmanDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL 35294, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The goal of this review is to explain how to design a biomaterial approach to control the adaptive response to injury, with an emphasis on skin wounds. The strategies will be selected based on whether they have a reasonable probability of meeting the desired clinical outcome vs. just comparing the pros and cons of different strategies. To do this, the review will look at the normal adaptive response in adults and why it does not meet the desired clinical outcome in most cases. In addition, the adaptive response will be looked at in cases where it does meet the clinical performance requirements including animals that regenerate and for fetal wound healing. This will lead to how biomaterials can be used to alter the overall adaptive response to allow it to meet the desired clinical outcome. The important message of the review is that you need to use the engineering design process, not the scientific method, to design a clinical treatment. Also, the clinical performance requirements are functional, not structural. The last section will give some specific examples of controlling the adaptive response for two skin injuries: burns and pressure ulcers. For burns, it will cover some preclinical studies used to justify a clinical study as well as discuss the results of a clinical study using this system. For pressure ulcers, it will cover some preclinical studies for two different approaches: electrical stimulation and degradable/regenerative scaffolds. For electrical stimulation, the results of a clinical study will be presented.

Indexed as

adaptive response controlburn treatmentpressure ulcer treatmentwound healing

Identifiers

PMID36143676
PMCPMC9503963

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.