Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25803703›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Compressive viscoelasticity of freshly excised mouse skin is dependent on specimen thickness, strain level and rate.

Yuxiang Wang, Kara L Marshall, Yoshichika Baba, Ellen A Lumpkin, Gregory J Gerling

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Yuxiang WangDepartment of Systems and Information Engineering, University of Virginia, 151 Engineers Way, Charlottesville, Virginia, 22903, United States of America; Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, University of Virginia, 122 Engineers Way, Charlottesville, Virginia, 22903, United States of America.
Kara L MarshallDepartment of Dermatology, Columbia University College of Physicians & Surgeons, 1150 St. Nicholas Ave., New York, New York, 10032, United States of America.
Yoshichika BabaDepartment of Dermatology, Columbia University College of Physicians & Surgeons, 1150 St. Nicholas Ave., New York, New York, 10032, United States of America.
Ellen A LumpkinDepartment of Dermatology, Columbia University College of Physicians & Surgeons, 1150 St. Nicholas Ave., New York, New York, 10032, United States of America; Department of Physiology & Cellular Biophysics, Columbia University College of Physicians & Surgeons, 1150 St. Nicholas Ave., New York, New York, 10032, United States of America.
Gregory J GerlingDepartment of Systems and Information Engineering, University of Virginia, 151 Engineers Way, Charlottesville, Virginia, 22903, United States of America; Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Virginia, 415 Lane Road, Charlottesville, Virginia, 22908, United States of America.
Columbia University · US

Funding

Peripheral Mechanisms Governing Tactile Encoding During Normal Target RemodelingR01NS073119 · NINDS · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI GERLING, GREGORY JOHN, LUMPKIN, ELLEN A · 2010 to 2016
$2.5M
NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS073119NINDS NIH HHS R01NS073119
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although the skin's mechanical properties are well characterized in tension, little work has been done in compression. Here, the viscoelastic properties of a population of mouse skin specimens (139 samples from 36 mice, aged 5 to 34 weeks) were characterized upon varying specimen thickness, as well as strain level and rate. Over the population, we observed the skin's viscoelasticity to be quite variable, yet found systematic correlation of residual stress ratio with skin thickness and strain, and of relaxation time constants with strain rates. In particular, as specimen thickness ranged from 211 to 671 μm, we observed significant variation in both quasi-linear viscoelasticity (QLV) parameters, the relaxation time constant (τ1 = 0.19 ± 0.10 s) and steady-state residual stress ratio (G∞ = 0.28 ± 0.13). Moreover, when τ1 was decoupled and fixed, we observed that G∞ positively correlated with skin thickness. Second, as steady-state stretch was increased (λ∞ from 0.22 to 0.81), we observed significant variation in both QLV parameters (τ1 = 0.26 ± 0.14 s, G∞ = 0.47 ± 0.17), and when τ1 was fixed, G∞ positively correlated with stretch level. Third, as strain rate was increased from 0.06 to 22.88 s-1, the median time constant τ1 varied from 1.90 to 0.31 s, and thereby negatively correlated with strain rate. These findings indicate that the natural range of specimen thickness, as well as experimental controls of compression level and rate, significantly influence measurements of skin viscoelasticity.

Indexed as

AnimalsCompressive StrengthComputer SimulationElasticityMiceModels, BiologicalSkinStress, MechanicalViscosity

Identifiers

PMID25803703
PMCPMC4372409
OpenAlexW1988245044

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.