ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2026
Biological performance evaluation of graphene nanoplatelets for intracranial direct current stimulation.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Graphene nanoplatelets (GNPs) offer promising properties for neural interface applications, particularly in intracranial direct current (DC) stimulation, due to their high charge injection capacity, flexibility, and biocompatibility. In this study, we comprehensively evaluate the biological and functional performance of GNP-based electrodes for acute and chronic cortical stimulation and recording. GNP electrodes were fabricated via screen-printing on flexible polyimide substrates. They were assessed for cytotoxicity using RAW 264.7 macrophage cell lines and primary hippocampal cultures, showing no evidence of cell death or toxicity. Long-term implantation in non-human primates (50 days) revealed no signs of infection, inflammation, or cortical damage, supporting the biostability of the material. Magnetic resonance imaging confirmed that GNPs produce no imaging artifacts, affirming their compatibility with standard neuroimaging protocols. Functionally, epidural DC stimulation using GNP electrodes modulated neuronal firing rates in the auditory cortex in a polarity-dependent manner, consistent with classical effects of DC stimulation. Furthermore, the same electrodes reliably recorded auditory-evoked potentials, demonstrating dual functionality for stimulation and recording. These findings position screen-printed GNP electrodes as safe, versatile, and effective tools for neurophysiological applications, and highlight their potential for future use in translational neuroscience and neurotherapeutic settings.
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.