ArticleJournal of materials science. Materials in medicine2019
Electrospun gelatin-polyethylenimine blend nanofibrous scaffold for biomedical applications.
Article in Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- A comparative study of the epithelial regeneration capacities of two biomaterials in vitro.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Electrolyte-Electrocatalyst Interfacial Effects of Polymeric Materials for Tandem COACS applied materials & interfaces · 2024Article
- Improved cell growth on additively manufactured Ti64 substrates with varying porosity and nanofibrous coating.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Microfabrication of a biomimetic arcade-like electrospun scaffold for cartilage tissue engineering applications.Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this study, gelatin-polyethylenimine blend nanofibers (GEL/PEI) were fabricated via electrospinning with different ratios (9:1, 6:1, 3:1) to integrate the properties of both the polymers for evaluating its biomedical application. From scanning electron microscopy, the average diameter of blend nanofibers (265 ± 0.074 nm to 340 ± 0.088 nm) was observed to be less than GEL nanofibers (403 ± 0.08 nm). The incorporation of PEI with gelatin resulted in improved thermal stability of nanofibers whereas the Young's modulus was observed to be higher at 9:1 ratio when compared with other ratios. The in vitro studies showed that the GEL/PEI nanofibers with 9:1 ratio promoted better cell adhesion and viability. GEL/PEI nanofibers with 9:1 and 6:1 showed hemolysis within the permissible limits. From the results, it could be interpreted that GEL/PEI nanofibers with 9:1 ratio proved to be a better scaffold thereby making them a potential candidate for tissue engineering applications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31776679What 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.