ReviewPolymers2026
A State-of-the-Art Review of Polymer-Enabled Bionic Vascular Self-Healing Cementitious Materials: Vascular Fabrication, Healing Agent Use, and Healing Efficiency Evaluation.
Review in Polymers, 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This review provides an overview of the latest advances in bionic vascular self-healing cement, focusing on vascular design, fabrication, selection of healing agents, transport and curing mechanisms, and performance evaluation methods. Compared to systems based on microcapsules and microorganisms, vascular networks enable directed and efficient transport of healing agents and repeated healing; however, the presence of hollow channels results in an inevitable loss of mechanical properties. Additive manufacturing, in situ printing based on Pickering emulsions, and direct printing of cement-based or multi-material systems have enhanced geometric flexibility and scalability. However, issues such as channel quality, polymer-cement interface stability, and on-site quality control remain unclear. Regarding the selection of healing agents, epoxy resin systems are generally more suitable for structural healing, polyurethanes are suitable for rapid sealing and wide or irregular cracks, while silicate healing agents are suitable for healing where cement compatibility and durability are prioritized. The most critical research gap lies in the lack of standardized, full-scale, multi-cycle, and long-term environmental validation, which limits the practical engineering application of vascular self-healing technology. Future research should prioritize the integrated design of various performance metrics, the long-term durability of polymers, standardized benchmark testing, and validation based on actual service conditions.
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.