Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34835602›Full record

ReviewNanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2021

Graphene Transfer: A Physical Perspective.

Xavier Langston, Keith E Whitener

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

2 authors.

Xavier LangstonChemistry Division, US Naval Research Laboratory, 4555 Overlook Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20375, USA.
Keith E WhitenerChemistry Division, US Naval Research Laboratory, 4555 Overlook Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20375, USA.

Funding

United States Naval Research Laboratory Base Program
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Graphene, synthesized either epitaxially on silicon carbide or via chemical vapor deposition (CVD) on a transition metal, is gathering an increasing amount of interest from industrial and commercial ventures due to its remarkable electronic, mechanical, and thermal properties, as well as the ease with which it can be incorporated into devices. To exploit these superlative properties, it is generally necessary to transfer graphene from its conductive growth substrate to a more appropriate target substrate. In this review, we analyze the literature describing graphene transfer methods developed over the last decade. We present a simple physical model of the adhesion of graphene to its substrate, and we use this model to organize the various graphene transfer techniques by how they tackle the problem of modulating the adhesion energy between graphene and its substrate. We consider the challenges inherent in both delamination of graphene from its original substrate as well as relamination of graphene onto its target substrate, and we show how our simple model can rationalize various transfer strategies to mitigate these challenges and overcome the introduction of impurities and defects into the graphene. Our analysis of graphene transfer strategies concludes with a suggestion of possible future directions for the field.

Indexed as

adhesionchemical vapor depositionelectronicsfabricationgraphenetransfer

Identifiers

PMID34835602
PMCPMC8625831

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.