ReviewJournal of materials science. Materials in medicine2026
Synchronizing degradation with regeneration: a model-driven framework for designing biodegradable biomaterials in bone tissue engineering.
Review in Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bone regeneration is a complex biological process, and the repair of critical-sized bone defects is often difficult, highlighting the need to develop biodegradable scaffolds that can effectively synergize with tissue repair. This paper introduces a model-based bone repair design framework that matches the kinetics of material degradation with the spatiotemporal stages of bone repair. We systematically evaluated the degradation mechanisms and tunability of four classes of biomaterials-metals (Mg, Fe, Zn), ceramics (HA, β-TCP, bioactive glass), polymers (PLGA, PCL), and composites-and mapped established mathematical models (linear partial differential equations, sigmoid curves, response-diffusion partial differential equations, and mechanobiological finite element models) to specific bone defect sizes and clinical scenarios. Based on this classification, we propose a four-step clinical design to guide researchers in completing the following steps: (1) calculating patient-specific healing timelines using first-order heuristics; (2) selecting appropriate material classes based on mechanical and biological requirements; (3) designing degradation kinetics to match the healing stages; and (4) validating scaffold-tissue alignment. To achieve quantitative assessment, we introduce the synchronization index (SI), a provisional index designed to quantify the correlation between actual implant degradation and patient-specific target curves. While the SI and the healing timeline formula are currently proposed only as conceptual design tools and require prospective experimental and clinical validation, their integration provides a structured path for scaffold development, moving it from experimental trial and error to precise, model-based engineering design. The goal of this framework is to facilitate the rational design of smart, resorbable implants that dynamically match the biological and mechanical requirements of bone regeneration.
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.