MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414487125 · doi:10.1002/bip.70050

On the Rheological Properties and Printability of Sodium Alginate–Carboxymethyl Chitosan Composite Solutions for Tissue Scaffold Printing

2025· article· en· W4414487125 on OpenAlexafffund
Xavier L. Tabil, Tate Cao, Daniel Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueBiopolymers · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Printing in Biomedical Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSaskatchewan Health Research FoundationUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsRheologyScaffoldComposite numberViscoelasticityViscositySodium alginateChitosanDynamic mechanical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Composites of sodium alginate (Alg) and carboxymethyl chitosan (CMCS) are used to 3D print tissue scaffolds, but the rheological properties and printability of these composites remain underreported, resulting in time-consuming trial-and-error printing. This study investigates these properties to rigorously design the 3D printing process. Dynamic shear tests characterize viscoelastic and frequency-dependent properties, while steady shear tests assess the apparent viscosity and temperature-dependent viscosity. A novel approach based on mass flow rate models guides the printing of two-layer scaffolds for printability analysis. Brightfield microscopy and printability indexes quantify the deviations between printed and designed scaffolds, defined as printability. Results show that Alg predominantly directs the rheological properties. At 4% w/v Alg, the addition of < 3% w/v CMCS reduces elasticity, contrary to the trend where increasing CMCS increases elasticity. CMCS improves the thermal resistance of the composites, while Alg reduces it. Of the composites printed, a 4% w/v Alg + 1% w/v CMCS formulation most accurately replicates the designed scaffold, and adding CMCS improves scaffold printing repeatability by at least threefold compared to Alg-only solutions. These findings provide a framework that informs the preparation and performance of Alg-CMCS composites with tunable properties, advancing scaffold bioprinting for tissue engineering.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.356

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiopolymersSame topic3D Printing in Biomedical ResearchFrench-language works237,207