ReviewBiosensors2025
Wearable Electrochemical Biosensors for Monitoring and Management of Chronic Wounds.
Review in Biosensors, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Electroactive Microbiomes: Electron Transfer Mechanisms and Environmental Biotechnology Applications.Environmental microbiology reports · 2026Review
- From Reactive to Proactive Healthcare: Synergizing Wearable Biomarkers and Machine Learning in Digital Therapeutics.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Multifunctional conductive dressings for wound healing support.Chemical science · 2026Review
- Stimuli-Responsive Nanomaterial-Based Biosensor Structures for Wound Care: pH, ROS, and Temperature Sensing Strategies.Micromachines · 2026Review
- Metal-Functionalized Nanozymes in Antibacterial Wound Management: Recent Advances and Future Perspectives.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Biomaterial strategies for precision regeneration of the tooth extraction socket: integrating site phenotype, pathological microenvironment, and healing sequence.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Chronic wounds constitute a major global public health challenge, characterized by a high risk of infection, prolonged healing times, and frequent recurrence. Conventional wound assessment methods, which primarily rely on visual clinical inspection and laboratory-based analyses, are limited by inherent subjectivity, delayed feedback, and a lack of capacity for real-time monitoring of the dynamic biochemical changes at the wound site. Significantly, recent advancements in flexible electronics, nanomaterials, and energy harvesting technologies have boosted the rapid development of wearable electrochemical biosensors. These devices have emerged as a transformative platform for the continuous, non-invasive analysis of critical biomarkers within the wound microenvironment, including pH, temperature, inflammatory cytokines, metabolites, and pathogen-derived molecules. This review critically examines the latest progress in wearable electrochemical biosensors for wound monitoring and management. Key discussions include (1) the special requirements for sensor design, targeting the chronic wound's pathological characteristics; (2) cutting-edge development in self-powered systems, multimodal sensor integration, closed-loop theranostics, and artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted decision-making; and (3) a critical appraisal of challenges in accuracy, stability, biocompatibility, energy management, and clinical translation. Finally, the review explores future trends, such as biodegradable sensors, multi-parameter fusion algorithms, and remote intelligent management systems, with the aim of establishing a foundational framework and providing technical guidance for developing next-generation intelligent wound care solutions.
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.