Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38505225›Full record

ReviewBiophysics reviews2022

Performance of nanoparticles for biomedical applications: The

Simone Berger, Martin Berger, Christoph Bantz, Michael Maskos, Ernst Wagner

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biophysics reviews, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Magnetic Hyperthermia via ZnPharmaceutics · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Investigation of the impact of lipid nanoparticle compositions on the delivery and T cell response of circRNA vaccine.Journal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society · 2025
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Dynamic carriers for therapeutic RNA delivery.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Simone BergerPharmaceutical Biotechnology, Department of Pharmacy, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU) Munich, Butenandtstr. 5-13, D-81377 Munich, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3572-7205
Martin BergerDepartment of Chemistry, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz, Duesbergweg 10-14, D-55128 Mainz, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0926-653X
Christoph BantzFraunhofer Institute for Microengineering and Microsystems IMM, Carl-Zeiss-Str. 18-20, D-55129 Mainz, Germany.
Michael Maskos
Ernst WagnerPharmaceutical Biotechnology, Department of Pharmacy, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU) Munich, Butenandtstr. 5-13, D-81377 Munich, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8413-0934
Carl Zeiss (Germany) · DELudwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DEJohannes Gutenberg University Mainz · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nanomedicine has a great potential to revolutionize the therapeutic landscape. However, up-to-date results obtained from

Identifiers

PMID38505225
PMCPMC10903387
OpenAlexW4224236684

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.