ArticleJournal of materials science. Materials in medicine2024
3D printed polycaprolactone/gelatin/ordered mesoporous calcium magnesium silicate nanocomposite scaffold for bone tissue regeneration.
Article in Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nanoporous-based biomaterials in biomedical applications: from fundamentals and biosensing to drug delivery, wound healing, and tissue engineering.Nanoscale advances · 2026Review
- Sculpting the Future of Bone: The Evolution of Absorbable Materials in Orthopedics.Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.) · 2026Review
- Mesoporous Bioactive Glasses: A Powerful Tool in Tissue Engineering and Drug Delivery.Advanced healthcare materials · 2026Review
- Bioglasses Versus Bioactive Calcium Phosphate Derivatives as Advanced Ceramics in Tissue Engineering: Comparative and Comprehensive Study, Current Trends, and Innovative Solutions.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025Review
- 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Tissue engineering scaffolds are three-dimensional structures that provide an appropriate environment for cellular attachment, proliferation, and differentiation. Depending on their specific purpose, these scaffolds must possess distinct features, including appropriate mechanical properties, porosity, desired degradation rate, and cell compatibility. This investigation aimed to fabricate a new nanocomposite scaffold using a 3D printing technique composed of poly(ε-caprolactone) (PCL)/Gelatin (GEL)/ordered mesoporous calcium-magnesium silicate (om-CMS) particles. Different weight ratios of om-CMS were added and optimized, and a series of scaffolds were constructed for comparison purposes, including PCL 50%/Gel 50%, PCL 50%/Gel 45%/om-CMS%5, and PCL 50%/Gel 40%/om-CMS%10. The optimized weight ratio of om-CMS was 10% without leaving behind negative effects on the filaments' structure. The scaffolds' physical and chemical properties were assessed using various techniques, and their degradation rate, bioactivity potential, cell viability, attachment, and ALP activity were evaluated in vitro. The results demonstrated that the PCL 50%/Gel 40%/om-CMS10% scaffold had promising potential for further studies in bone tissue regeneration.
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.