ArticlePolymers2022
Influences of Process Parameters of Near-Field Direct-Writing Melt Electrospinning on Performances of Polycaprolactone/Nano-Hydroxyapatite Scaffolds.
Article in Polymers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Synthesis, Characterization, and Osteogenic Ability of Fibrillar Polycaprolactone Scaffolds Containing Hydroxyapatite Nanoparticles.ACS applied materials & interfaces · 2025Article
- Understanding the Significance of Layer Bonding in Melt Electrowriting.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2024Article
- Magnesium-Doped Nano-Hydroxyapatite/Polyvinyl Alcohol/Chitosan Composite Hydrogel: Preparation and Characterization.International journal of nanomedicine · 2024Article
- Chitosan Hydrogel as Tissue Engineering Scaffolds for Vascular Regeneration Applications.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Article
- Enhanced In Vitro Biocompatible Polycaprolactone/Nano-Hydroxyapatite Scaffolds with Near-Field Direct-Writing Melt Electrospinning Technology.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In this paper, near-field direct-writing melt electrospinning technology was employed to fabricate a polycaprolactone/nano-hydroxyapatite (PCL/nHA) scaffold for future applications in tissue engineering. The influences of different fabrication parameters on the structural characteristics, mechanical properties, and thermal stability of the scaffolds were discussed. It was found that the moving speed of the receiving plate had the most significant effect on the scaffold performance, followed by the receiving distance and spinning voltage. The results also showed that these process parameters affected the fiber diameter, corresponding coefficient of variation, porosity of the composite scaffolds, and mechanical properties of the samples, including the tensile strength and fiber peeling strength. Moreover, the process parameters could influence the thermal degradation performance and melting process. Although the mass loss of the composite scaffolds was not obvious after degradation, the mechanical performance degraded severely. It was concluded that the more appropriate process parameters for preparing PCL/nHA scaffolds were a spinning voltage of -4 kV, receiving distance of 4 mm, moving speed of receiving plate of 5 mm/s, and melt temperature of 130 °C. This study proved that near-field direct-writing melt electrospinning technology is a good method to obtain PCL/nHA composite scaffolds with an excellent mechanical properties and desired morphology for future tissue engineering applications.
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.