The current need for organ and tissue replacement, repair, and regeneration for patients is continually growing such that supply is not meeting demand primarily due to a paucity of donors as well as biocompatibility issues leading to immune rejection of the transplant. In order to overcome these drawbacks, scientists have investigated the use of scaffolds as an alternative to transplantation. These scaffolds are designed to mimic the extracellular matrix (ECM) by providing structural support as well as promoting attachment, proliferation, and differentiation with the ultimate goal of yielding functional tissues or organs. Initial attempts at developing scaffolds were problematic and subsequently inspired an interest in 3D printing as a mode for generating scaffolds. Utilizing three-dimensional printing (3DP) technologies, ECM-like scaffolds can be produced with a high degree of complexity, where fine details can be included at a micrometer level. In this Review, the criteria for printing viable and functional scaffolds, scaffolding materials, and 3DP technologies used to print scaffolds for tissue engineering are discussed. Creating biofunctional scaffolds could potentially help to meet the demand by patients for tissues and organs without having to wait or rely on donors for transplantation.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 September 2024.
All research outputs
#2,586,599
of 32,013,898 outputs
Outputs from Advanced Healthcare Materials
#308
of 3,706 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,006
of 296,267 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advanced Healthcare Materials
#3
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,013,898 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,706 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 296,267 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
