ArticleACS omega2019
Preparation and Comparison of Reduced Graphene Oxide and Carbon Nanotubes as Fillers in Conductive Natural Rubber for Flexible Electronics.
Article in ACS omega, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 55 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of Carbon Fillers on Electrical and Mechanical Properties of Water-Based Polymer Nanocomposites.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Exploring the advances in 2D materials as a quest for energy storage electrode materials.RSC advances · 2026Review
- The Role of Reduced Graphene Oxide in Enhancing the Mechanical and Thermal Properties of a Rubber Cover Joint.Polymers · 2024Article
- Visualization of deformation-induced changes in carbon nanotube networks in rubber composites using lock-in thermography.RSC advances · 2023Article
- Effect of Single-Walled Carbon Nanotubes on the Cross-Linking Process in Natural Rubber Vulcanization.Polymers · 2022Article
- Article
- Rheological and Mechanical Properties of Silica/Nitrile Butadiene Rubber Vulcanizates with Eco-Friendly Ionic Liquid.Polymers · 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
8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Conductive natural rubber (NR) nanocomposites were prepared by solvent-casting suspensions of reduced graphene oxide (rGO) or carbon nanotubes (CNTs), followed by vulcanization of the rubber composites. Both rGO and CNT were compatible as fillers in the NR as well as having sufficient intrinsic electrical conductivity for functional applications. Physical (thermal) and chemical reduction of GO were investigated, and the results of the reductions were monitored by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy for establishing a reduction protocol that was useful for the rGO nanocomposite preparation. Field-emission scanning electron microscopy showed that both nanofillers were adequately dispersed in the main NR phase. The CNT composite displays a marked mechanical hysteresis and higher elongation at break, in comparison to the rGO composites for an equal fraction of the carbon phase. Moreover, the composite conductivity was always ca. 3-4 orders of magnitude higher for the CNT composite than for the rGO composites, the former reaching a maximum conductivity of ca. 10.5 S/m, which was explained by the more favorable geometry of the CNT versus the rGO sheets. For low current density applications though, both composites achieved the necessary percolation and showed the electrical conductivity needed for being applied as flexible conductors for a light-emitting diode.
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.