ArticlePolymers2020
A Facile Fabrication of Biodegradable and Biocompatible Cross-Linked Gelatin as Screen Printing Substrates.
Article in Polymers, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Towards Intelligent Wound Care: Hydrogel-Based Wearable Monitoring and Therapeutic Platforms.Polymers · 2025Review
- Article
- Waste to Wealth Approach: Improved Antimicrobial Properties in Bioactive Hydrogels through Humic Substance-Gelatin Chemical Conjugation.Biomacromolecules · 2023Article
- Determination of Stiffness and the Elastic Modulus of 3D-Printed Micropillars with Atomic Force Microscopy-Force Spectroscopy.ACS applied materials & interfaces · 2023Article
- Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
This study focuses on preparation and valuation of the biodegradable, native, and modified gelatin film as screen-printing substrates. Modified gelatin film was prepared by crosslinking with various crosslinking agents and the electrode array was designed by screen-printing. It was observed that the swelling ratio of C-2, crosslinked with glutaraldehyde and EDC/NHS (1-ethyl-3-(3-dimethylaminopropyl) carbodiimide/N-hydroxysuccinimide) was found to be lower (3.98%) than that of C-1 (crosslinked with only glutaraldehyde) (8.77%) and C-0 (without crosslinking) (28.15%). The obtained results indicate that the swelling ratios of both C-1 and C-2 were found to be lower than that of C-0 (control one without crosslinking). The Young's modulus for C-1 and C-2 was found to be 8.55 ± 0.57 and 23.72 ± 2.04 kPa, respectively. Hence, it was conveyed that the mechanical strength of C-2 was found to be two times higher than that of C-l, suggesting that the mechanical strength was enhanced upon dual crosslinking in this study also. The adhesion study indicates that silver ink adhesion on the gelation surface is better than that of carbon ink. In addition, the electrical response of C-2 with a screen-printed electrode (SPE) was found to be the same as the commercial polycarbonate (PC) substrate. The result of MTT (3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyl tetrazolium bromide) assay suggested that the silver SPE on C-2 was non-cytotoxic toward L929 fibroblast cells proliferation. The results indicated that C-2 gelatin is a promising material to act as a screen-printing substrate with excellent biodegradable and biocompatible properties.
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.