ReviewNanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Gold Nanoparticles for Wound Healing in Animal Models.
Review in Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Broccoli-mediated gold nanoparticles: Eco-friendly synthesis and nano-bio interactions promoting wound healing and targeted cytotoxicity.Journal, genetic engineering & biotechnology · 2026Article
- Exploration of recent advancements of nanoparticle-based therapeutics emphasis on diabetic-related chronic wound management: a comprehensive review.Archives of pharmacal research · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGold nanoparticles (GNPs) are increasingly studied for their potential to enhance wound healing, but their overall efficacy remains uncertain.
methodsWe conducted a systematic meta-analysis (search date: 14 May 2025) across five databases. Included were randomized animal studies comparing GNPs to placebo, reporting wound closure percentages and relevant variance measures. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane and CAMARADES tools. Cohen's d was used to estimate effect size under a random-effects model.
resultsThirty-one studies met the inclusion criteria. The pooled effect size was d = 4.52 (95% CI: 3.61 to 5.43; z = 9.73;
conclusionGNPs significantly accelerate wound healing in animal models, supporting their potential as therapeutic agents.
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.