Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 278

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

In vitro degradation behavior of electrospun polyglycolide, polylactide, and poly(lactide‐co‐glycolide)

You, Young, Min, Byung‐Moo, Lee, Seung Jin, Lee, Taek Seung, Park, Won Ho·2005·Journal of Applied Polymer Science
DOI 10.1002/app.21116
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The electrospinning of polyglycolide (PGA), poly(L‐lactide) (PLA), and poly(lactide‐co‐glycolide) (PLGA; L‐lactide/glycolide = 50/50) was performed with chloroform or 1,1,1,3,3,3‐hexafluoro‐2‐propanol (HFIP) as a spinning solvent to fabricate their nanofiber matrices. The morphology of the electrospun PGA, PLA, and PLGA nanofibers was investigated with scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The PLGA nanofibers, electrospun with a nonpolar chloroform solvent, had a relatively large average diameter (760 nm), and it had a relatively broad distribution in the range of 200–1800 nm. On the other hand, the PGA and PLA fibers, electrospun with a polar HFIP solvent, had a small average diameter (∼300 nm) with a narrow distribution. This difference in the fiber diameters may be associated with the polarity of the solvent. Also, the in vitro degradation of PGA, PLA, and PLGA nanofiber matrices was examined in phosphate buffer solutions (pH 7.4) at 37°C. The degradation rates of the nanofiber matrices were fast, in the order of PGA > PLGA ≫ PLA. Structural and morphological changes during in vitro degradation were investigated with differential scanning calorimetry and wide‐angle X‐ray diffraction. For the PGA matrix, a significant increase in the crystallinity during the early stage was detected, as well as a gradual decrease during the later period, and this indicated that preferential hydrolytic degradation in the amorphous regions occurred with cleavage‐induced crystallization, followed by further degradation in the crystalline region. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 95: 193–200, 2005

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/app.21116

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 278

Metadata

Authors
You, Y., Min, B., Lee, S. J., Lee, T. S., & Park, W. H.
Venue
Journal of Applied Polymer Science
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2004-11-22
Volume
95
Issue
2
Pages
193-200
ISSN
  • 0021-8995 (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-4628
DOI
10.1002/app.21116
OpenAlex
W1979798149
Cited by
278
References
25
FWCI
4.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.