Comparison study on hyaline cartilage versus fibrocartilage formation in a pig model by using 3D-bioprinted hydrogel and hybrid constructs.

Alizadeh Sardroud H, Rosa GDS, Dust W, Cham TC, Roy G, Bater S, Chicoine A, Honaramooz A, Chen X, Eames BF

Open source

DOI
10.1088/1758-5090/ad88a6
Published
2024 Nov 5
Container
Biofabrication
Publisher
Not recorded
Open access
no

Credibility signals

limited evidence Score 43/100 under policy 1.0.0. This is a metadata assessment, not a judgment of the paper's conclusions.

Show all credibility signals

Cite this work

BibTeX

@article{allodium:10.1088/1758-5090/ad88a6,
  title = {Comparison study on hyaline cartilage versus fibrocartilage formation in a pig model by using 3D-bioprinted hydrogel and hybrid constructs.},
  author = {Alizadeh Sardroud H and Rosa GDS and Dust W and Cham TC and Roy G and Bater S and Chicoine A and Honaramooz A and Chen X and Eames BF},
  year = {2024},
  journal = {Biofabrication},
  doi = {10.1088/1758-5090/ad88a6},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1088/1758-5090/ad88a6}
}

RIS

TY  - JOUR
TI  - Comparison study on hyaline cartilage versus fibrocartilage formation in a pig model by using 3D-bioprinted hydrogel and hybrid constructs.
AU  - Alizadeh Sardroud H
AU  - Rosa GDS
AU  - Dust W
AU  - Cham TC
AU  - Roy G
AU  - Bater S
AU  - Chicoine A
AU  - Honaramooz A
AU  - Chen X
AU  - Eames BF
PY  - 2024
JO  - Biofabrication
DO  - 10.1088/1758-5090/ad88a6
UR  - https://doi.org/10.1088/1758-5090/ad88a6
ER  - 

APA

H, A. S., GDS, R., W, D., TC, C., G, R., S, B., A, C., A, H., X, C., & BF, E. (2024). Comparison study on hyaline cartilage versus fibrocartilage formation in a pig model by using 3D-bioprinted hydrogel and hybrid constructs.. Biofabrication. https://doi.org/10.1088/1758-5090/ad88a6

Source records