Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37484420›Full record

ReviewHeliyon2023

Influence of electrospinning parameters on biopolymers nanofibers, with emphasis on cellulose & chitosan.

Abdallah Refate, Yehia Mohamed, Mariam Mohamed, Maiada Sobhy, Karim Samhy, Omar Khaled, Khaled Eidaroos, Hazem Batikh, Emad El-Kashif, Samah El-Khatib and 1 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Adoption of polyvinyl alcohol electrospinning materials for skin wound dressing.Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine · 2025
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. 3D Electrospinning of Macroscopic PLLA Structures.Macromolecular rapid communications · 2025
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

11 authors.

Abdallah RefateMechanical Design & Production Dept., Faculty of Engineering, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt.
Yehia MohamedMechatronics Program, Faculty of Engineering, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt.
Mariam MohamedElectronics and Communication Dept., Faculty of Engineering, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt.
Maiada SobhyMechanical Design & Production Dept., Faculty of Engineering, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt.
Karim SamhyMechanical Design & Production Dept., Faculty of Engineering, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt.
Omar KhaledMechanical Design & Production Dept., Faculty of Engineering, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt.
Khaled EidaroosMechanical Design & Production Dept., Faculty of Engineering, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt.
Hazem BatikhMechanical Design & Production Dept., Faculty of Engineering, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt.
Emad El-KashifMechanical Design & Production Dept., Faculty of Engineering, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt.
Samah El-KhatibMechanical Engineering Dept., Faculty of Engineering & Technology, Future University in Egypt, 11835 Cairo, Egypt.
Sherif MehannyMechanical Design & Production Dept., Faculty of Engineering, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Electrospinning is an effective method for producing high-quality biopolymer nanofibers, such as cellulose and chitosan. Cellulose nanofibers have excellent mechanical properties and biocompatibility, making them a promising material for tissue engineering. Chitosan nanofibers are biodegradable, biocompatible, and antimicrobial, making them ideal for biomedical applications. The electrospinning parameters, including solution concentration, power supply voltage, orifice diameter, temperature, humidity, and flow rate, play a crucial role in determining the nanofiber diameter, morphology, and mechanical properties, as well as their suitability for various applications. Objective: This systematic review aims to synthesize and evaluate the current evidence on the influence of electrospinning parameters on the production and properties of cellulose and chitosan nanofibers. Methods: A comprehensive search of electronic databases was conducted to identify relevant studies. The inclusion criteria were studies that investigated the effect of electrospinning parameters on cellulose and chitosan nanofibers. Results: It was found that for cellulose, the average fiber diameter increased with increasing each of solution concentration, power supply voltage, orifice diameter, temperature, and humidity. Contrary to tip - collector distance and some optimal points in temperature, where average fiber diameter decreased. For chitosan, the change in voltage and tip to collector distance did not alter the average fiber diameter except for some readings of voltage, which behaved differently. On the other hand, the average fiber diameter increased with increasing flow rate. Conclusion: The review highlights the importance of considering electrospinning parameters in the production of high-quality biopolymer nanofibers and provides insights into the optimization of these parameters for specific applications. This review also highlights the need for further research to better understand the underlying mechanisms of electrospinning and to optimize the process to produce biopolymer nanofibers with improved properties.

Indexed as

CelluloseChitosanElectrospinningMembraneNanocelluloseNanofibers

Identifiers

PMID37484420
PMCPMC10361112

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.