ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2023
A Comprehensive Look at In Vitro Angiogenesis Image Analysis Software.
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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bioinspired Polymeric Scaffolds for Improvement of Angiogenesis and Tissue Engineering: A Review.Polymers · 2026Review
- Microfluidic device to study spatial and temporal response of astrocyte networks in response to changes in the biochemical milieu.Microsystems & nanoengineering · 2026Article
- Article
- Comparative characteristics ofWorld journal of cardiology · 2026Review
- Hepatic vein-derived factors may affect pulmonary arteriovenous malformations after single ventricle palliation by modulating vascular cell behavior.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- VaMiAnalyzer: an open source, Python-based application for analysis of 3D in vitro vasculogenic mimicry assays.BMC bioinformatics · 2025Article
- A graph-theoretic framework for quantitative analysis of angiogenic networks.BioData mining · 2025Article
- An Overview on the Big Players in Bone Tissue Engineering: Biomaterials, Scaffolds and Cells.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
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
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.