ReviewRegenerative medicine2025
Toward equitable regenerative medicine: a health equity research framework for emerging regenerative treatments.
Review in Regenerative medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Biomaterials for intervertebral disc regeneration: Niche reprogramming, precision therapeutics, and structural reconstruction.Bioactive materials · 2027Review
- Health Disparities in Orthobiologics: Factors Influencing Access to Platelet-Rich Plasma for Knee Osteoarthritis.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2026Article
- CAR-T cell therapy in cancer immunotherapy - Biology, clinical successes, and emerging challenges: A review.Biomolecules & biomedicine · 2026Review
- Regenerative Medicine Approaches to Stress Urinary Incontinence.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Regenerative medicine continues to advance rapidly, yet research examining health disparities within this field remains notably limited. The distinctive characteristics of regenerative therapies - complex manufacturing, specialized delivery, and personalized approaches - present unique challenges for equitable health care access beyond traditional disparities. This gap is concerning as many conditions targeted by regenerative treatments disproportionately affect underserved populations. Our analysis of the literature identifies knowledge gaps and demonstrates the critical need for a multi-level approach to health equity research in regenerative medicine. We propose a research framework involving three key steps. First: systematic investigation of field-specific access barriers through established health disparity frameworks, focusing on factors uniquely relevant to regenerative therapies across individual, interpersonal, organizational, community, and societal levels. Second: development and rigorous evaluation of targeted, multi-level interventions addressing these barriers. Third: implementation of evidence-based strategies using equity-focused frameworks to translate findings into practice, ensuring equity considerations are embedded throughout development and delivery processes. By prioritizing health equity research while many regenerative treatments are still developing, the field has an unprecedented opportunity to create inclusive access pathways and ensure its potentially revolutionary therapies benefits all populations.
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.