Jennifer A. Flegg, Shakti N. Menon, Philip K. Maini, D. L. Sean McElwain
Abstract
Over the last 30 years, numerous research groups have attempted to provide mathematical descriptions of the skin wound healing process. The development of theoretical models of the interlinked processes that underlie the healing mechanism has yielded considerable insight into aspects of this critical phenomenon that remain difficult to investigate empirically. In particular, the mathematical modeling of angiogenesis, i.e., capillary sprout growth, has offered new paradigms for the understanding of this highly complex and crucial step in the healing pathway. With the recent advances in imaging and cell tracking, the time is now ripe for an appraisal of the utility and importance of mathematical modeling in wound healing angiogenesis research. The purpose of this review is to pedagogically elucidate the conceptual principles that have underpinned the development of mathematical descriptions of wound healing angiogenesis, specifically those that have utilized a continuum reaction-transport framework, and highlight the contribution that such models have made toward the advancement of research in this field. We aim to draw attention to the common assumptions made when developing models of this nature, thereby bringing into focus the advantages and limitations of this approach. A deeper integration of mathematical modeling techniques into the practice of wound healing angiogenesis research promises new perspectives for advancing our knowledge in this area. To this end we detail several open problems related to the understanding of wound healing angiogenesis, and outline how these issues could be addressed through closer cross-disciplinary collaboration.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 October 2015.
All research outputs
#20,292,660
of 22,829,083 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#9,377
of 13,603 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#230,064
of 274,274 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#66
of 92 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,829,083 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,603 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 274,274 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 92 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
