Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34035794›Full record

ArticleAdvanced functional materials2020

An Electroactive Oligo-EDOT Platform for Neural Tissue Engineering.

Kaja I Ritzau-Reid, Christopher D Spicer, Amy Gelmi, Christopher L Grigsby, James F Ponder, Victoria Bemmer, Adam Creamer, Ramon Vilar, Andrea Serio, Molly M Stevens

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Advanced functional materials, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Mechanobiological Dynamics-Inspired Mechanomodulatory Biomaterials.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Biomedical Implants with Charge-Transfer Monitoring and Regulating Abilities.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2021
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Kaja I Ritzau-ReidDepartment of Materials, Department of Bioengineering, Institute of Biomedical Engineering, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK.
Christopher D SpicerDepartment of Materials, Department of Bioengineering, Institute of Biomedical Engineering, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK; Department of Medical Biochemistry and Biophysics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm 171 77, Sweden; Department of Chemistry, York Biomedical Research Institute, University of York, Heslington YO10 5DD, UK.
Amy GelmiDepartment of Materials, Department of Bioengineering, Institute of Biomedical Engineering, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK; Applied Chemistry and Environmental Science, School of Science, RMIT University, Melbourne 3000, Australia.
Christopher L GrigsbyDepartment of Medical Biochemistry and Biophysics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm 171 77, Sweden.
James F PonderDepartment of Chemistry, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK.
Victoria BemmerDepartment of Materials, Department of Bioengineering, Institute of Biomedical Engineering, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK.
Adam CreamerDepartment of Materials, Department of Bioengineering, Institute of Biomedical Engineering, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK.
Ramon VilarDepartment of Chemistry, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK.
Andrea SerioDepartment of Materials, Department of Bioengineering, Institute of Biomedical Engineering, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK; Centre for Craniofacial & Regenerative Biology, King's College London and The Francis Crick Institute, Tissue Engineering and Biophotonics Division, Dental Institute, King's College London, London SE1 9RT, UK.
Molly M StevensDepartment of Materials, Department of Bioengineering, Institute of Biomedical Engineering, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK; Department of Medical Biochemistry and Biophysics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm 171 77, Sweden.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/K026666/1Wellcome Trust 213949
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The unique electrochemical properties of the conductive polymer poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene):polystyrene sulfonate (PEDOT:PSS) make it an attractive material for use in neural tissue engineering applications. However, inadequate mechanical properties, and difficulties in processing and lack of biodegradability have hindered progress in this field. Here, the functionality of PEDOT:PSS for neural tissue engineering is improved by incorporating 3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene (EDOT) oligomers, synthesized using a novel end-capping strategy, into block co-polymers. By exploiting end-functionalized oligoEDOT constructs as macroinitiators for the polymerization of poly(caprolactone), a block co-polymer is produced that is electroactive, processable, and bio-compatible. By combining these properties, electroactive fibrous mats are produced for neuronal culture via solution electrospinning and melt electrospinning writing. Importantly, it is also shown that neurite length and branching of neural stem cells can be enhanced on the materials under electrical stimulation, demonstrating the promise of these scaffolds for neural tissue engineering.

Indexed as

3,4-ethylenedioxythiophenebiomaterialselectrospinningneurite outgrowthtissue engineering

Identifiers

PMID34035794
PMCPMC7610826

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.