ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2025
Experimental evaluation of the healing potential of
Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Objective: To evaluate the wound-healing efficacy of a 10% macerated Methods: Experimental, completely randomized study in Wistar rats. Wound area reduction was measured daily. The association between time and wound closure was assessed by linear regression. Histological evaluation (hematoxylin and eosin; Masson's trichrome) examined inflammation, collagen deposition, angiogenesis/vascularization, and re-epithelialization. Results: Time was strongly associated with wound closure (correlation coefficient > 0.80; p < 0.05). Conclusion: A 10% S. portulacastrum gel promoted wound healing with enhanced collagen deposition and re-epithelialization, showing effects comparable to Nebacetin. The findings support S. portulacastrum as a promising, low-cost, and potentially sustainable therapeutic alternative and reinforce the value of Caatinga biodiversity.
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.