ArticleRSC advances2024
Machine learning-guided morphological property prediction of 2D electrospun scaffolds: the effect of polymer chemical composition and processing parameters.
Article in RSC advances, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Review
- Engineered Metal-Organic Frameworks (MOFs)-electrospun nanofibers for wound healing: a review.Journal of biological engineering · 2026Review
- Advances in Computational Modeling and Machine Learning of Cellulosic Biopolymers: A Comprehensive Review.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Advances in Polypyrrole Nanofiber Composites: Design, Synthesis, and Performance in Tissue Engineering.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Electrospun nanofibers: Focus on local therapeutic delivery targeting infectious disease.Journal of drug delivery science and technology · 2025Article
- AI-driven biomaterial design: an intelligent closed loop from reverse design to biological response.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Among various methods for fabricating polymeric tissue engineering scaffolds, electrospinning stands out as a relatively simple technique widely utilized in research. Numerous studies have delved into understanding how electrospinning processing parameters and specific polymeric solutions affect the physical features of the resulting scaffolds. However, owing to the complexity of these interactions, no definitive approaches have emerged. This study introduces the use of Simplified Molecular Input Line Entry System (SMILES) encoding method to represent materials, coupled with machine learning algorithms, to model the relationships between material properties, electrospinning parameters and scaffolds' physical properties. Here, the scaffolds' fiber diameter and conductivity have been predicted for the first time using this approach. In the classification task, the voting classifier predicted the fibers diameter with a balanced accuracy score of 0.9478. In the regression task, a neural network regressor was architected to learn the relations between parameters and predict the fibers diameter with
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.