ArticlePolymers2020
Tailoring of Durable Conductive and UV-Shielding Properties on Cotton and Polyester Fabrics by PEDOT:PSS Screen-Printing.
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, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Single-cell RNA-seq analysis decodes the kidney microenvironment induced by polystyrene microplastics in mice receiving a high-fat diet.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2024Article
- A Review of Electro Conductive Textiles Utilizing the Dip-Coating Technique: Their Functionality, Durability and Sustainability.Polymers · 2022Review
- Review on PEDOT:PSS-Based Conductive Fabric.ACS omega · 2022Review
- Metallisation of Textiles and Protection of Conductive Layers: An Overview of Application Techniques.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
In the present study, cotton (Co) and polyester (PES) fabrics were screen-printed with a conductive poly3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene:polystyrene sulfonate (PEDOT:PSS) printing paste along with a commercially-available screen-printing binder (SFXC) or waterborne polyurethane resin (WPU), in order to enhance wash and wear durability, and to improve some functional properties, without essentially influencing the physical-mechanical properties of the base material, as well as the introduced fabrics' conductivity. The application of a conductive polymer coating reduced transmittance in the whole UV region drastically, indicating good UV-shielding ability in the treated fabrics. Moreover, the employed binders improved the fabrics' protection against harmful solar UV radiation significantly, depending on the type of fibre and binder. Furthermore, the SFXC binder intensified the hydrophobicity of Co as compared to the WPU binder, and, on the other hand, WPU reduced the hydrophobicity of PES. Finally, the screen-printed fabrics were washed up to 20 cycles and rubbed up to 20,000 cycles, and characterised by means of mass loss determination and electrical resistivity measurement. Both binders enlarged polymer stability against the effect of washing and rubbing, depending on the number of cycles, the type and amount of employed binder, the type of fibres, and the thickness and uniformity of coatings.
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.