ReviewBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Bone Regeneration: Mini-Review and Appealing Perspectives.
Review in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Unexpected periosteal bone apposition including newly embedded osteocytes occurs around a mouse calvaria critical defect, independently of the presence of biomaterials.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Analysis of Biomechanical Characteristics of Bone Tissues Using a Bayesian Neural Network: A Narrative Review.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025Review
- Assessment of the Osseointegration of Pure-Phase β-Tricalcium Phosphate (β-TCP) Ceramic Cylinder Implants in Critical Segmental Radial Bone Defects in Rabbits.Veterinary sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bone is a natural mineral-organic nanocomposite protecting internal organs and allowing mobility. Through the ages, numerous strategies have been developed for repairing bone defects and fixing fractures. Several generations of bone repair biomaterials have been proposed, either based on metals, ceramics, glasses, or polymers, depending on the clinical need, the maturity of technologies, and knowledge of the natural constitution of the bone tissue to be repaired. The global trend in bone implant research is shifting toward osteointegrative, bioactive and possibly stimuli-responsive biomaterials and, where possible, resorbable implants that actively promote the regeneration of natural bone tissue. In this mini-review, the fundamentals of bone healing materials and clinical challenges are summarized and commented on with regard to progressing scientific discoveries. The main types of bone-healing materials are then reviewed, and their specific relevance to the field is reminded, with the citation of reference works. In the final part, we highlight the promise of hybrid organic-inorganic bioactive materials and the ongoing research activities toward the development of multifunctional or stimuli-responsive implants. This contribution is expected to serve as a commented introduction to the ever-progressing field of bone regeneration and highlight trends of future-oriented 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.