ArticleACS biomaterials science & engineering2025
Establishing a Bioink Assessment Protocol: GelMA and Collagen in the Bioprinting of a Potential
Article in ACS biomaterials science & engineering, 2025. 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.
- Support-Enabled 3D Printing of Complex Anisotropic Hydrogel Structures Using Cellulose-Based Inks: Pathways Toward Biomimetic Human Aorta Models.ACS biomaterials science & engineering · 2026Article
- Advancing Stem Cell Bioprinting to Bridge Engineered and Natural Tissue Constructs.Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.) · 2026Review
- 3D bioprinting of microfluidic systems for cardiac regenerative medicine: from biofabrication to organ-on-a-chip.Journal of biological engineering · 2026Review
- Three-dimensional-printed shape-memory composite scaffold for meniscus repair.The Journal of international medical research · 2026Article
- UV-Crosslinking Effects on the Physicochemical and Rheological Properties of Fish Collagen Ink for 3D Bioprinting.Polymers · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Collagen and gelatin methacryloyl (GelMA) are widely studied biomaterials for extrusion-based bioprinting (EBB) due to their excellent biological properties and ability to mimic the extracellular matrix of native tissues. This study aims to establish a preliminary workflow for approaching EBB by assessing collagen and GelMA printability and biological performance. GelMA was selected for its cost-effectiveness and ease of synthesis, while our collagen formulation was specifically optimized for printability, which is a challenging aspect of bioprinting. A parallel evaluation of their printability and biological performance is provided to develop a preliminary 3D intestinal model replicating the submucosa, lamina propria, and epithelial layer. Rheological analyses demonstrated that both materials exhibit a shear-thinning behavior. Collagen (u-CI) displayed a shear-thinning parameter
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.