ArticlePolymers2025
Comparing the Printability, Biological and Physicochemical Properties of Bio-Based Photo-Crosslinkable Hydrogels.
Article in Polymers, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Application of hydrogels in 3D tumor microenvironment modeling and drug screening for cervical cancer: A review.Bioengineering & translational medicine · 2026Review
- Advances in Sustainable Polymeric Materials, 3rd Edition.Polymers · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Bio-based photo-crosslinkable hydrogels are used in tissue engineering as three-dimensional printable scaffolds due to their functional and biological similarities with the extracellular matrix (ECM). In this work, emerging bioink candidates such as chitosan, alginate and gelatin-based photo-crosslinkable hydrogel were developed using extrusion-based 3D printing to establish a better understanding of their applicability. The polymers were methacrylated by the same methacrylation reaction pathway, which enabled successful light-induced 3D printing. Morphology, swelling (6-40%), mechanical (Young's modulus, 0.1-0.5 KPa) and rheological properties (300-1000 Pa), degradation kinetics (10->60 days) and printability of the gels were also characterized in identical conditions for the first time. 3D-printability results indicated that methacrylated gelatin enhanced printability, shape fidelity and integrity of printed structures compared to methacrylated alginate, which presents structural instability and poorer printing control due to its low crosslink density. Moreover, cell attachment and Live/Dead assays using bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (BM-MSCs) showed that all formulations have good biocompatibility for use as scaffolds. Specifically, gelatin-based hydrogels showed a higher level of BM-MSCs attachment and spreading than the other types of hydrogels. Overall, our results suggest that the hydrogels based on these three biopolymers present good potential as a biomaterial for light-induced extrusion-based 3D printing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.