ArticleScientific reports2025
Structural and biological characterization of carbon-graphene biomaterials derived from black liquor with functional properties for bone tissue engineering.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Impact Resistance and Energy Absorption Analysis of Crossover Frames with Different Materials.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Carbon-based biomaterials are promising for the field of tissue bioengineering due to their biocompatibility, high porosity, and physicochemical properties that allow functionalization and combination with other materials. In this study, carbon derived from black liquor was used to develop bone grafts. This carbon matrix (CA) was associated with nanomaterials-graphene, graphene oxide, and nano-graphite (CAG, CAGO, and CANG, respectively)-for potential applications in the repair of orofacial malformations. The scaffolds were evaluated for biocompatibility and their effect on cell viability using mesenchymal stem cells, followed by implantation in 16 male Wistar rats with non-critical bone defects in both tibias. Histological analysis demonstrated that all scaffolds were biocompatible, with defects showing repair, osteoprogenitor cell presence, and vascular channel formation. Histomorphometric assessment of bone neoformation revealed the highest repair potential in the CAG group (89% at 30 days), while the other groups showed similar bone formation: CA = 72%, CAGO = 69%, and CANG = 80%. All scaffolds promoted bone tissue formation, with the carbon-graphene scaffold yielding the greatest percentage of new bone.
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.