Characterization and Machine Learning-Driven Property Prediction of a Novel Hybrid Hydrogel Bioink Considering Extrusion-Based 3D Bioprinting
Sarah R., Schimmelpfennig K., Rohauer R., Lewis CL., Limon SM., Habib A.
Laboratory Study, published in Gels (2025) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
- Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
- Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
- Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
- Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
- Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.
- Study type
- Laboratory Study
- Journal
- Gels (2025)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 39852017
- PMCID
- PMC11765179
- DOI
- 10.3390/gels11010045
- Citations
- 8
Abstract (original English)
The field of tissue engineering has made significant advancements with extrusion-based bioprinting, which uses shear forces to create intricate tissue structures. However, the success of this method heavily relies on the rheological properties of bioinks. Most bioinks use shear-thinning. While a few component-based efforts have been reported to predict the viscosity of bioinks, the impact of shear rate has been vastly ignored. To address this gap, our research presents predictive models using machine learning (ML) algorithms, including polynomial fit (PF), decision tree (DT), and random forest (RF), to estimate bioink viscosity based on component weights and shear rate. We utilized novel bioinks composed of varying percentages of alginate (2-5.25%), gelatin (2-5.25%), and TEMPO-Nano fibrillated cellulose (0.5-1%) at shear rates from 0.1 to 100 s -1 . Our study analyzed 169 rheological measurements using 80% training and 20% validation data. The results, based on the coefficient of determination (R2) and mean absolute error (MAE), showed that the RF algorithm-based model performed best: [(R2, MAE) RF = (0.99, 0.09), (R2, MAE) PF = (0.95, 0.28), (R2, MAE) DT = (0.98, 0.13)]. These predictive models serve as valuable tools for bioink formulation optimization, allowing researchers to determine effective viscosities without extensive experimental trials to accelerate tissue engineer
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
- • This is preclinical work; animal or laboratory results cannot be applied to humans.
Evidence level
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.