ArticleScientific reports2018
Comparison of frequency and strain-rate domain mechanical characterization.
Article in Scientific reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Characterizing and Engineering Biomimetic Materials for Viscoelastic Mechanotransduction Studies.Tissue engineering. Part B, Reviews · 2022Review
- Voltage-Driven Alterations to Neuron Viscoelasticity.Bioelectricity · 2022Article
- Development of Biodegradable Polymer Blends Based on Chitosan and Polylactide and Study of Their Properties.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Indentation probe with optical fibre array-based optical coherence tomography for material deformation.Journal of microscopy · 2021Article
- Layer-specific ultrasound elastography using a multi-layered shear wave dispersion model for assessing the viscoelastic properties.Physics in medicine and biology · 2021Article
- Engineering Gels with Time-Evolving Viscoelasticity.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Indentation is becoming increasingly popular to test soft tissues and (bio)materials. Each material exhibits an unknown intrinsic "mechanical behaviour". However, limited consensus on its "mechanical properties" (i.e. quantitative descriptors of mechanical behaviour) is generally present in the literature due to a number of factors, which include sample preparation, testing method and analysis model chosen. Viscoelastic characterisation - critical in applications subjected to dynamic loading conditions - can be performed in either the time- or frequency-domain. It is thus important to selectively investigate whether the testing domain affects the mechanical results or not. We recently presented an optomechanical indentation tool which enables both strain-rate (nano-[Formula: see text]) and frequency domain (DMA) measurements while keeping the sample under the same physical conditions and eliminating any other variability factor. In this study, a poly(dimethylsiloxane) sample was characterised with our system. The DMA data were inverted to the time-domain through integral transformations and then directly related to nano-[Formula: see text] strain-rate dependent results, showing that, even though the data do not perfectly overlap, there is an excellent correlation between them. This approach indicates that one can convert an oscillatory measurement into a strain-rate one and still capture the trend of the "mechanical behaviour" of the sample investigated.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.