ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2024
Nanomedicine in Ophthalmology: From Bench to Bedside.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nanocarrier-Mediated Non-Invasive Drug Delivery for Wet Age-Related Macular Degeneration: Advances and Translational Challenges.Pharmaceutics · 2026Review
- Tracer Techniques in Ophthalmology: Ocular Applications and Systemic Connections.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Tumor microenvironment conversion through intelligent nanomedicine: a paradigm shift in overcoming chemoresistance.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Multifunctional nanoplatforms for optic nerve regeneration integrating anti-inflammatory, epigenetic, and ionic mechanisms with emerging artificial intelligence technologies.Cell biology and toxicology · 2025Review
- Recent advances and future challenges in nanosystems for ocular drug delivery.The Journal of pharmacology and experimental therapeutics · 2025Review
- Nanomedicine-Based Treatments for Rare and Aggressive Ocular Cancers: Advances in Drug Delivery.Current treatment options in oncology · 2025Review
- Influence of Different Cationic Polymer-Based Micelles on the Corneal Behavior and Anti-Cataract Effect of Diosmetin.Pharmaceutics · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ocular diseases such as cataract, refractive error, age-related macular degeneration, glaucoma, and diabetic retinopathy significantly impact vision and quality of life worldwide. Despite advances in conventional treatments, challenges like limited bioavailability, poor patient compliance, and invasive administration methods hinder their effectiveness. Nanomedicine offers a promising solution by enhancing drug delivery to targeted ocular tissues, enabling sustained release, and improving therapeutic outcomes. This review explores the journey of nanomedicine from bench to bedside, focusing on key nanotechnology platforms, preclinical models, and case studies of successful clinical translation. It addresses critical challenges, including pharmacokinetics, regulatory hurdles, and manufacturing scalability, which must be overcome for successful market entry. Additionally, this review highlights safety considerations, current marketed and FDA-approved nanomedicine products, and emerging trends such as gene therapy and personalized approaches. By providing a comprehensive overview of the current landscape and future directions, this article aims to guide researchers, clinicians, and industry stakeholders in advancing the clinical application of nanomedicine in ophthalmology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.