MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393022908 · doi:10.1101/2024.03.14.584172

Direct Ink Writing of Graphene Oxide Reinforced 13-93B1 Bioactive Glass Scaffolds for Bone Tissue Engineering Applications

2024· preprint· en· W4393022908 on OpenAlexafffund
Kartikeya Dixit, Ashok Vishwakarma, Hitendra Kumar, Keekyoung Kim, Niraj Sinha

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBone Tissue Engineering Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersScience and Engineering Research BoardAlberta Innovates
KeywordsMaterials scienceBioactive glassTissue engineeringScaffoldGrapheneBiomedical engineeringComposite materialPorosityScanning electron microscopeNanotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Graphene-reinforced bioactive glass scaffolds have gained significant attention in the field of bone tissue engineering due to their unique combination of mechanical strength, bioactivity, and electrical conductivity. Additive manufacturing techniques, such as 3D printing, provide a versatile platform for fabricating these scaffolds with precise control over their architecture and composition. Consequently, in this work, we have fabricated graphene oxide (GO)-reinforced 13-93B1 bioactive glass scaffold using the direct ink writing technique. A Pluronic F-127- based ink was prepared for scaffold fabrication, and its rheological properties were assessed for shear thinning behaviour, structural support, and recovery. Further, the fabricated scaffolds were characterized using micro-computed tomography, scanning electron microscopy, and energy dispersive x-ray spectroscopy. Additionally, computational fluid dynamics simulations with Dulbecco’s modified eagle medium and blood were performed to evaluate the perfusion kinetics of the scaffolds. The inclusion of GO enhanced the compressive strength of the fabricated scaffolds by ∼225%. The morphological characterization based on micro-computed tomography showed that additively manufactured scaffolds have appropriate porosity, pore size, pore throat size, and interconnectivity. The live-dead assay results showed no cytotoxicity towards C2C12 mouse myoblast cells. Also, cell adhesion and cell viability results show better cell growth on the nanocomposite scaffolds. Overall, the fabricated scaffold is found suitable for bone tissue engineering applications.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.199 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicBone Tissue Engineering MaterialsFrench-language works237,207