Mechanical and biological behavior of double network hydrogels reinforced with alginate versus gellan gum by

Conclusion

bartels_AA — 2024-12-04 09:29:19 UTC

This research paper was a really good one and dived deeper into the statistical analyses they used and the interpretation of the results they got from the tests. Most of the tests used were appropriate. Though some of the tests were not stated, I was able to infer from my understanding of statistical tests which test followed and why it followed. This has given me a deeper understanding of statistical analysis and shows how, when analysing data, we are exposed to several options, but it takes the right test to make the right inference. The tests conducted here were conducted systematically, allowing you to see the credibility of their interpretation. This is also a doorway to analysing the data we collected in our experiment. It has exposed me to several tests that were not discussed in class but would be useful in making the right inference. I am happy I got to do this before writing the final research manuscript, I now know other tests and I am not limited to t-tests and one-way ANOVA to analyse my data.

Statistical Analysis

bartels_AA — 2024-12-04 09:32:09 UTC

The experiments used different concentrations of the reinforcement materials and at least three replicates from each experimental group were utilised to calculate hydrogels' swelling and mechanical properties. The data are presented as mean ± standard deviation. For analysing the impact of a higher concentration of reinforcing network on the swelling ratio and mechanical properties, a Levene's test was conducted to check for equal variances(homogeneity) across the group, an assumption used when using parametric tests like t-tests and ANOVA. Levene’s test gave a p-value less than their set of 0.05, indicating a significance level. They then proceeded to perform a Kruskal-Wallis test (a non-parametric test), which again showed a level of significance, hence leading to the performance of Dunn's post hoc analysis. Dunn’s post hoc analysis is the best option because it is also a non-parametric post hoc test and, hence, would give a better reflection of the significance rather than a parametric post hoc test like Tukey’s HSD. SPSS software was used for their data analysis, adding to the credibility of their results.

For the statistical analysis of the cell culture experiments, a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed. This implies that Levene’s test would have shown no significant difference in the variance and allowed the use of a one-way ANOVA test. A one-way ANOVA test was the best test to use in this case because there were more than two groups (four groups in total) on which this analysis was being run, and since there was only one independent variable, a one-way ANOVA was chosen. The research paper did not state whether there was any significance, but since no post-hoc test was performed, it is safe to assume that there was no level of significance. However, in cases where there is a level of significance, post-hoc analysis is used, such as Tukey’s Honestly Significant Difference (HSD) test or a Games-Howell test.

Finally, to analyse the effect of the concentration of PEGDMA on the swelling ratio and mechanical properties, a linear regression was performed for each of the four groups (1 wt% Al, 2 wt% Al, 1 wt% GG, 2 wt% GG). For the regression analyses, the concentration of PEGDMA was utilized as the independent variable, while the type of the reinforcing network and its percentage were held constant. The linear regression analyses revealed statistically significant linear relationships (p < 0.05). A linear regression analysis was appropriate in this context because they were analysing the effect of the concentration of PEGDMA on some properties, thus the independent variable was concentration while the dependent variables were the mechanical properties and swelling ratio. This helps to show the linear relationship between the dependent and independent variables. It might be known that a p-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant for all statistical tests in this paper.

Article Summary

bartels_AA — 2024-12-04 09:36:39 UTC

Polyethylene glycol (PEG) based hydrogels have excellent characteristics for biomedical applications, such as high hydrophilicity coupled with high biocompatibility for cells and biomolecules, but have been discovered to have low strength and toughness. To address this issue, various types of double network (DN) hydrogels have been developed with exceptional strength, stretchability, and toughness. The two types of materials that are used in double-network hydrogels are alginate and gellan gum. This present study compares the mechanical properties of alginate and gellan gum reinforced double network PEG-based hydrogels over a range of polymer network concentrations. The research was conducted by Alaa Ajam, Yuwan Huang, Md Shariful Islam, Kristopher A. Kilian, and Jamie J. Kruzic in Australia. Several mechanical tests were conducted on the two, and it was found that gellan gum is a better reinforcing network for the double network PEG-based hydrogels since it had better mechanical properties than alginate and was there the best solution to the low strength and toughness of PEG-based hydrogels

Link: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2024.106642