ArticleMacromolecular bioscience2025
Size-Dependent Elastic Modulus and Core-Shell Structural Characteristics of Electrospun Nanofibers.
Article in Macromolecular bioscience, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Agave-Derived Carbon Dots Incorporated into PVA/Chitosan Nanofibers for Prolonged Antibacterial Activity.ACS omega · 2026Article
- Mechanical tunability of oriented and random electrospun poly(ε-caprolactone) scaffolds via concentration, molecular weight, and environment.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Size-Dependent Elastic Modulus and Core-Shell Structural Characteristics of Electrospun Nanofibers.Macromolecular bioscience · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study investigates the size-dependent mechanical properties of electrospun polycaprolactone (PCL) nanofibers by analyzing the relationship between fiber diameter and Young's modulus. Experimental data reveal a clear inverse trend: as fiber diameter decreases, stiffness increases significantly, indicating strong surface and confinement effects at the nanoscale. Two theoretical models were employed to interpret the observed behavior: a simplified core-shell model (Model 1) and an extended model (Model 2) incorporating surface tension and curvature elasticity. Both models accurately fit the experimental data across a diameter range of 450-850 nm, with Model 2 providing slightly better agreement at intermediate diameters (∼600-750 nm), where surface mechanics become more prominent. The enhanced stiffness in thinner fibers is attributed to increased surface-to-volume ratio and tighter molecular packing, while larger fibers exhibit bulk-dominated mechanical responses. These findings highlight the importance of nanoscale geometry and surface effects in determining mechanical properties and suggest that fiber stiffness can be systematically tuned via diameter control during electrospinning.
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.