ArticleMicromachines2018
Emerging Anti-Fouling Methods: Towards Reusability of 3D-Printed Devices for Biomedical Applications.
Article in Micromachines, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Decoding triple negative breast cancer bone metastasis: from 3D bioprinted models to clinical translation.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2026Review
- Recent Advances in Polymer Science and Fabrication Processes for Enhanced Microfluidic Applications: An Overview.Micromachines · 2024Review
- 3D Printing to Enable Self-Breathing Fuel Cells.3D printing and additive manufacturing · 2024Article
- Long-term cyclic use of a sample collector for toilet-based urine analysis.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Editorial for the Special Issue on 3D Printed Microfluidic Devices.Micromachines · 2018Article
- Assessing the Reusability of 3D-Printed Photopolymer Microfluidic Chips for Urine Processing.Micromachines · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Microfluidic devices are used in a myriad of biomedical applications such as cancer screening, drug testing, and point-of-care diagnostics. Three-dimensional (3D) printing offers a low-cost, rapid prototyping, efficient fabrication method, as compared to the costly-in terms of time, labor, and resources-traditional fabrication method of soft lithography of poly(dimethylsiloxane) (PDMS). Various 3D printing methods are applicable, including fused deposition modeling, stereolithography, and photopolymer inkjet printing. Additionally, several materials are available that have low-viscosity in their raw form and, after printing and curing, exhibit high material strength, optical transparency, and biocompatibility. These features make 3D-printed microfluidic chips ideal for biomedical applications. However, for developing devices capable of long-term use, fouling-by nonspecific protein absorption and bacterial adhesion due to the intrinsic hydrophobicity of most 3D-printed materials-presents a barrier to reusability. For this reason, there is a growing interest in anti-fouling methods and materials. Traditional and emerging approaches to anti-fouling are presented in regard to their applicability to microfluidic chips, with a particular interest in approaches compatible with 3D-printed chips.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.