ArticleRSC advances2019
Biomimetic composite scaffold from an
Article in RSC advances, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 42 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development of Hydroxyapatite Coatings for Orthopaedic Implants from Colloidal Solutions: Part 1-Effect of Solution Concentration and Deposition Kinetics.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Cellulose-based composite scaffolds for bone tissue engineering and localized drug delivery.Bioactive materials · 2023Review
- Review
- Plant Nanomaterials and Inspiration from Nature: Water Interactions and Hierarchically Structured Hydrogels.Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.) · 2021Review
- Accelerated degradation of HAP/PLLA bone scaffold by PGA blending facilitates bioactivity and osteoconductivity.Bioactive materials · 2021Article
- Human Teeth-Derived Bioceramics for Improved Bone Regeneration.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Review
- Facile Synthesis of Calcium Hydroxide Nanoparticles onto TEMPO-Oxidized Cellulose Nanofibers for Heritage Conservation.ACS omega · 2019Article
- 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
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A novel nanocomposite scaffold was developed by homogeneous deposition of hydroxyapatite (HAP) on a cellulose nanocrystals (CNCs) matrix suspended in a simulated body fluid (SBF). By adjusting the pH of the SBF, the HAP content in the nanocomposite could be controlled between 15 wt% and 47 wt%. Physical and chemical characteristics of the nanocomposites were analyzed by SEM, FTIR, XRD, SAED, and TEM, which confirmed the successful incorporation of HAP onto the CNCs. The nanocomposites were then freeze-casted into porous scaffolds by different solidification technologies (
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.