Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36015686›Full record

ReviewPolymers2022

Chitosan-Based Biomaterials for Bone Tissue Engineering Applications: A Short Review.

Antonia Ressler

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Polymers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

43 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Biomimetic Scaffold of Chitosan fromAdvanced pharmaceutical bulletin · 2026
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

1 author.

Antonia ResslerFaculty of Chemical Engineering and Technology, University of Zagreb, Marulićev trg 19, HR-10000 Zagreb, Croatia.ORCID 0000-0003-2178-5188

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Natural bone tissue is composed of calcium-deficient carbonated hydroxyapatite as the inorganic phase and collagen type I as the main organic phase. The biomimetic approach of scaffold development for bone tissue engineering application is focused on mimicking complex bone characteristics. Calcium phosphates are used in numerous studies as bioactive phases to mimic natural bone mineral. In order to mimic the organic phase, synthetic (e.g., poly(ε-caprolactone), polylactic acid, poly(lactide-co-glycolide acid)) and natural (e.g., alginate, chitosan, collagen, gelatin, silk) biodegradable polymers are used. However, as materials obtained from natural sources are accepted better by the human organism, natural polymers have attracted increasing attention. Over the last three decades, chitosan was extensively studied as a natural polymer suitable for biomimetic scaffold development for bone tissue engineering applications. Different types of chitosan-based biomaterials (e.g., molded macroporous, fiber-based, hydrogel, microspheres and 3D-printed) with specific properties for different regenerative applications were developed due to chitosan's unique properties. This review summarizes the state-of-the-art of biomaterials for bone regeneration and relevant studies on chitosan-based materials and composites.

Indexed as

biomaterialsbone regenerationchitosancompositepolymerscaffold

Identifiers

PMID36015686
PMCPMC9416295

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.