Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38139453›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2023

A Comprehensive Look at In Vitro Angiogenesis Image Analysis Software.

Mariana Pereira, Jéssica Pinto, Belén Arteaga, Ana Guerra, Renato Natal Jorge, Fernando Jorge Monteiro, Christiane Laranjo Salgado

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Comparative characteristics ofWorld journal of cardiology · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Mariana Pereirai3S-Instituto de Investigação e Inovação em Saúde, Universidade do Porto, 4200-135 Porto, Portugal.
Jéssica Pintoi3S-Instituto de Investigação e Inovação em Saúde, Universidade do Porto, 4200-135 Porto, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0001-6325-1761
Belén Arteagai3S-Instituto de Investigação e Inovação em Saúde, Universidade do Porto, 4200-135 Porto, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0001-5965-8630
Ana GuerraINEGI-Instituto de Ciência e Inovação em Engenharia Mecânica e Engenharia Industrial, 4200-465 Porto, Portugal.
Renato Natal JorgeINEGI-Instituto de Ciência e Inovação em Engenharia Mecânica e Engenharia Industrial, 4200-465 Porto, Portugal.
Fernando Jorge Monteiroi3S-Instituto de Investigação e Inovação em Saúde, Universidade do Porto, 4200-135 Porto, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-1361-4605
Christiane Laranjo Salgadoi3S-Instituto de Investigação e Inovação em Saúde, Universidade do Porto, 4200-135 Porto, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-3844-1667
Universidade do Porto · PTInstitute of Mechanical Engineering and Industrial Mangement · PTUniversidad de Granada · ES

Funding

Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia CEEC-INST/00091/2018/CP1500/CT0019Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia PTDC/EME-APL/3058/2021Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia UIDB/04293/2020
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

One of the complex challenges faced presently by tissue engineering (TE) is the development of vascularized constructs that accurately mimic the extracellular matrix (ECM) of native tissue in which they are inserted to promote vessel growth and, consequently, wound healing and tissue regeneration. TE technique is characterized by several stages, starting from the choice of cell culture and the more appropriate scaffold material that can adequately support and supply them with the necessary biological cues for microvessel development. The next step is to analyze the attained microvasculature, which is reliant on the available labeling and microscopy techniques to visualize the network, as well as metrics employed to characterize it. These are usually attained with the use of software, which has been cited in several works, although no clear standard procedure has been observed to promote the reproduction of the cell response analysis. The present review analyzes not only the various steps previously described in terms of the current standards for evaluation, but also surveys some of the available metrics and software used to quantify networks, along with the detection of analysis limitations and future improvements that could lead to considerable progress for angiogenesis evaluation and application in TE research.

Indexed as

AngiogenesisTissue EngineeringCardiovascular Physiological PhenomenaCell Culture TechniquesExtracellular MatrixMicrovesselsTissue Scaffoldsangiogenesisbiomaterialscomputational biomechanicsimage analysistissue engineering

Identifiers

PMID38139453
PMCPMC10743557
OpenAlexW4389914387

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.