Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36669095›Full record

ArticleMolecular pharmaceutics2023

Development of

Kairi Lorenz, Liis Preem, Kadi Sagor, Marta Putrinš, Tanel Tenson, Karin Kogermann

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular pharmaceutics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Biofilm-Responsive Nanoplatforms for Infected Wound Reconstruction.International journal of nanomedicine · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Preparing a Dual-SpeciesMolecular pharmaceutics · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Development of Rapid and Economic In Vitro Assay and Biorelevant Ex Vivo Biofilm Inhibition Wound Model to Test the Antibacterial Efficacy of Wound Dressings.Wound repair and regeneration : official publication of the Wound Healing Society [and] the European Tissue Repair Society
    Article
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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kairi LorenzInstitute of Pharmacy, University of Tartu, Nooruse 1, 50411 Tartu, Estonia.
Liis PreemInstitute of Pharmacy, University of Tartu, Nooruse 1, 50411 Tartu, Estonia.
Kadi SagorInstitute of Technology, University of Tartu, Nooruse 1, 50411 Tartu, Estonia.
Marta PutrinšInstitute of Pharmacy, University of Tartu, Nooruse 1, 50411 Tartu, Estonia.
Tanel TensonInstitute of Technology, University of Tartu, Nooruse 1, 50411 Tartu, Estonia.
Karin KogermannInstitute of Pharmacy, University of Tartu, Nooruse 1, 50411 Tartu, Estonia.ORCID 0000-0002-6813-4828
University of Tartu · EE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Increasing evidence suggests that the chronicity of wounds is associated with the presence of bacterial biofilms. Therefore, novel wound care products are being developed, which can inhibit biofilm formation and/or treat already formed biofilms. A lack of standardized assays for the analysis of such novel antibacterial drug delivery systems enhances the need for appropriate tools and models for their characterization. Herein, we demonstrate that optimized and biorelevant

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsWound InfectionAnimalsBandagesBiofilmsChloramphenicolSwineAnti-Bacterial AgentsChloramphenicolantibacterialantibiofilmelectrospinningex vivo biofilm modelin vitro biofilm modelskin wound infectionwound dressings

Identifiers

PMID36669095
PMCPMC9907351
OpenAlexW4317565251

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.