Evidence mapPaperPMID 33808492Full record

ReviewPolymers2021

A Comparative Review of Natural and Synthetic Biopolymer Composite Scaffolds.

M Sai Bhargava Reddy, Deepalekshmi Ponnamma, Rajan Choudhary, Kishor Kumar Sadasivuni

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Polymers, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 319 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
319citing 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

319 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

259 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

4 authors.

M Sai Bhargava ReddyCenter for Nanoscience and Technology, Institute of Science and Technology, Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University, Hyderabad 500085, India.ORCID 0000-0002-2544-1908
Deepalekshmi PonnammaCenter for Advanced Materials, Qatar University, Doha P.O. Box 2713, Qatar.ORCID 0000-0002-5208-4870
Rajan ChoudharyRudolfs Cimdins Riga Biomaterials Innovations and Development Centre of RTU, Faculty of Materials Science and Applied Chemistry, Institute of General Chemical Engineering, Riga Technical University, Pulka St 3, LV-1007 Riga, Latvia.
Kishor Kumar SadasivuniCenter for Advanced Materials, Qatar University, Doha P.O. Box 2713, Qatar.ORCID 0000-0003-2730-6483

Funding

Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation Increase Competitiveness Program of NUST
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tissue engineering (TE) and regenerative medicine integrate information and technology from various fields to restore/replace tissues and damaged organs for medical treatments. To achieve this, scaffolds act as delivery vectors or as cellular systems for drugs and cells; thereby, cellular material is able to colonize host cells sufficiently to meet up the requirements of regeneration and repair. This process is multi-stage and requires the development of various components to create the desired neo-tissue or organ. In several current TE strategies, biomaterials are essential components. While several polymers are established for their use as biomaterials, careful consideration of the cellular environment and interactions needed is required in selecting a polymer for a given application. Depending on this, scaffold materials can be of natural or synthetic origin, degradable or nondegradable. In this review, an overview of various natural and synthetic polymers and their possible composite scaffolds with their physicochemical properties including biocompatibility, biodegradability, morphology, mechanical strength, pore size, and porosity are discussed. The scaffolds fabrication techniques and a few commercially available biopolymers are also tabulated.

Indexed as

biodegradabilitynatural biopolymerscaffoldssynthetic biopolymertissue engineering

Identifiers

PMID33808492
PMCPMC8037451

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 Socratic graph.