Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 233

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Alternative tissue engineering scaffolds based on starch: processing methodologies, morphology, degradation and mechanical properties

Open access
Gomes, M.E, Godinho, J.S, Tchalamov, D, Cunha, A.M, Reis, R.L·2002·Materials Science and Engineering: C

Abstract

Abstract An ideal tissue engineering scaffold must be designed from a polymer with an adequate degradation rate. The processing technique must allow for the preparation of 3-D scaffolds with controlled porosity and adequate pore sizes, as well as tissue matching mechanical properties and an appropriate biological response. This communication revises recent work that has been developed in our laboratories with the aim of producing 3-D polymeric structures (from starch-based blends) with adequate properties to be used as scaffolds for bone tissue engineering applications. Several processing methodologies were originally developed and optimised. Some of these methodologies were based on conventional melt-based processing routes, such as extrusion using blowing agents (BA) and compression moulding (combined with particulate leaching). Other developed technologies included solvent casting and particle leaching and an innovative in situ polymerization method. By means of using the described methodologies, it is possible to tailor the properties of the different scaffolds, namely their degradation, morphology and mechanical properties, for several applications in tissue engineering. Furthermore, the processing methodologies (including the blowing agents used in the melt-based technologies) described above do not affect the biocompatible behaviour of starch-based polymers. Therefore, scaffolds obtained from these materials by means of using one of the described methodologies may constitute an important alternative to the materials currently used in tissue engineering.

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 · 10.1016/s0928-4931(02)00008-5

Cites

2 of 2 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

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 233

Metadata

Authors
Gomes, M. E., Godinho, J. S., Tchalamov, D., Cunha, A. M., & Reis, R. L.
Venue
Materials Science and Engineering: C
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2002-05
Volume
20
Issue
1-2
Pages
19-26
ISSN
0928-4931 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2113664904
Cited by
233
References
2
FWCI
12.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Alternative tissue engineering scaffolds based on starch: processing methodologies, morphology, degradation and mechanical properties. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0928-4931(02)00008-5
The paper
Gomes, M. E., Godinho, J. S., Tchalamov, D., Cunha, A. M., & Reis, R. L. (2002). Alternative tissue engineering scaffolds based on starch: processing methodologies, morphology, degradation and mechanical properties. Materials Science and Engineering: C. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0928-4931(02)00008-5

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.