ArticleToxicology reports2026
Cytotoxicity evaluation, porosity and physicochemical study of bioactive glass nanocomposites for tissue engineering.
Article in Toxicology reports, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Nanoscale bioactive glasses have been developed as regenerative materials for tissue engineering, due to their biocompatibility, osteoconductivity, antibacterial properties and abilities for hard tissue formation. In this work, nano bioactive glass/alginate (n-BG/Alg) and nano bioactive glass/polyethylene glycole (n-BG/PEG) as nanocomposite scaffolds were synthesized via facile method and physicochemical properties compared with nano bioactive glass. To characterize the nanocomposites, Fourier Transform Infrared (FT-IR), X-ray powder Diffraction (XRD), Field Emission Scanning Electron Microscopy (FESEM), and Dispersive X-ray Analysis (EDX) were performed. The results showed desired interaction of polymers with nano bioactive glass and the size was estimated. The swelling ability and porosity of the scaffolds were evaluated and the results showed lower swelling and porosity percentage for composites compared to the nano bioactive glass scaffold. The cytocompatibility of nanocomposites were also evaluated using Methyl Thiazolyl-Tetrazolium (MTT) (3-(4, 5-dimethyl-2-thiazolyl)-2, 5-diphenyl-2H-tetrazolium bromide) assay. The doses of 5, 15, 25, 50, and 100 μg/mL of n-BG, n-BG/PEG and n-BG/Alg were studied to determine the survival rate of Human Gingival Fibroblast (HGF) cells. The results showed a significant difference (p˂0.001) compared to the positive control group in high concentrations during 48 h. The MTT assay confirms that the scaffolds have biocompatibility.
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.