ReviewBioactive materials2026
From physical modalities to energy-responsive biomaterials: Current strategies and challenges in tendon-to-bone healing.
Review in Bioactive materials, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cutting-Edge Smart Hydrogel Platforms for Improved Wound Healing.Pharmaceutics · 2026Review
- Immunoengineering in the field of tendon and bone regeneration: immunomodulatory biomaterials, delivery platforms, and preclinical models for chronic diseases.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Impaired functional regeneration following tendon-to-bone interface (TBI) injury is a major challenge in sports medicine. The rigidity and limited efficacy of existing rehabilitation strategies remain significant constraints. Physical modalities, leveraging advantages such as non-invasiveness, spatiotemporal controllability, and low immunogenicity, offer effective intervention options for the long-term management of TBI healing. However, conventional physical modalities struggle to address the complex pathological microenvironment involved in TBI healing. In contrast, therapeutic strategies utilizing physical energy-responsive biomaterials enable programmable, precise, and dynamic regulation, potentially integrating these advantages while overcoming inherent limitations, thereby opening new and effective therapeutic avenues for TBI healing. This review systematically examines the benefits, current applications, and shortcomings of physical modalities for TBI injuries, with particular focus on parameter-response relationships and underlying biological effector mechanisms. Furthermore, it summarizes the design strategies and application progress of energy-responsive biomaterials in TBI healing and discusses future directions and promising prospects, aiming to address the core therapeutic challenges in achieving robust TBI healing.
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.