Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42846382›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2026

Artificial intelligence in tissue engineering and regenerative medicine: from algorithmic capability to intelligent integration.

Melanie L Hart, Mary C Walsh, Corinna Raimondo, Ryuji Kato, Bernd Rolauffs

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Melanie L HartG.E.R.N. Research Center for Tissue Replacement, Regeneration and Neogenesis, Department of Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Medical Center-Albert-Ludwigs-University of Freiburg, Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany.
Mary C WalshMaidstone Consulting Group, Boston, MA, United States.
Corinna RaimondoMaidstone Consulting Group, Boston, MA, United States.
Ryuji KatoGraduate School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Nagoya University, Tokai National Higher Education and Research System, Nagoya, Aichi, Japan.
Bernd RolauffsG.E.R.N. Research Center for Tissue Replacement, Regeneration and Neogenesis, Department of Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Medical Center-Albert-Ludwigs-University of Freiburg, Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly integrated throughout the tissue engineering and regenerative medicine (TERM) pipeline, from literature synthesis, experimental design, and automation to image analysis, biological modeling, and knowledge dissemination. However, TERM differs fundamentally from many domains where AI has succeeded. Biological heterogeneity, limited datasets, evolving protocols, sparse ground truth, and high translational stakes constrain the development and deployment of AI-driven approaches. Consequently, AI should be seen as a collection of purpose-specific tools whose suitability, risks, and validation requirements depend on the context. This review examines how AI can be intelligently integrated across the TERM workflow, emphasizing how intended purpose, biological reality, and translational constraints shape technology selection. We examine AI's use as a framework for knowledge extraction, experimental planning, decision support, experimental execution, data generation, interpretation, and scientific communication. Key challenges include limited generalizability, uncertainty, validation, accountability, and the risk of confusing predictive performance with biological or mechanistic insight. We argue that many important gaps in AI-enabled TERM are not algorithmic but conceptual, methodological, and educational. Future progress will depend on purpose-aware AI literacy, uncertainty-aware modeling, validation strategies, human-in-the-loop workflows, and establishing community standards for transparency, reproducibility, and translation. Ultimately, AI should not be a shortcut around biological complexity, but a means of engaging with that complexity more explicitly and responsibly. Across the TERM pipeline, AI is best viewed as an amplifier of biological evidence and scientific reasoning rather than a substitute, with its greatest impact arising from intelligent integration into scientific practice rather than increasingly intelligent algorithms alone.

Indexed as

artificial intelligencegenerative AIhuman oversightlarge language modelsregenerative medicineresponsible AIriskstissue engineering

Identifiers

PMID42846382
PMCPMC13644394

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.