Open-source library of tissue engineering scaffolds
Materials & Design, ISSN: 0264-1275, Vol: 223, Page: 111154
2022
- 10Citations
- 39Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
Tissue engineering as a field may benefit from progressively implementing and spreading the use of standards, conceived to support the repeatability, replicability and efficient comparing of research results among experts in the field worldwide. Considering that scaffolds play a fundamental role in many tissue engineering strategies, it would be interesting to count with an internationally accepted set of geometries, acting as a library of lattices, porous materials and scaffolding structures, which could be employed for comparative purposes among materials and manufacturing technologies under development. To this end, an open-source library of tissue engineering scaffolds has been implemented. This library stands out for providing a comprehensive collection of scaffolds blueprints, designed considering the specific features of most additive manufacturing technologies applicable to tissue engineering and biofabrication. Besides, the library has been developed focusing on FAIR data principles along the development, for promoting: Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability and Reusability. The scaffolds are shared as open-source medical devices with the necessary documentation for facilitating their application. Similar initiatives may be synergically integrated towards an ISO standard on tissue engineering scaffolds.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264127522007766; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2022.111154; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85138193580&origin=inward; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0264127522007766; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2022.111154
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know