ReviewTrends in biotechnology2019
New Frontiers for Biofabrication and Bioreactor Design in Microphysiological System Development.
Review in Trends in biotechnology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 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
20 citing papers in PubMed.
- 3D bioprinting for cancer modeling and drug screening.Biomarker research · 2026Review
- From Technological Innovation to Clinical Translation: Progress and Challenges in 3D Bioprinting for the Development of Breast Cancer Bone Metastasis Models.Advanced healthcare materials · 2026Review
- Development of a Multi-Channel and Multilayered PDMS Microfluidic Platform for Real-Time Visualization and Multi-Condition Parallel Testing of Mechanically Stimulated Cells.Micromachines · 2026Article
- Construction, evaluation, and applications of renal barrier-on-a-chip system.Bioactive materials · 2026Review
- Self-driving bioprinting laboratories.Biofabrication · 2026Review
- Biofabrication of 3D-printed, pre-cross-linked alginate dialdehyde-gelatin (ADA-GEL) scaffolds for anFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Article
- Bioprinting of a multi-composition array to mimic intra-tumor heterogeneity of glioblastoma for drug evaluation.Microsystems & nanoengineering · 2024Article
- In vitro high-content tissue models to address precision medicine challenges.Molecular aspects of medicine · 2023Review
- Biofabrication of Modular Spheroids as Tumor-Scale Microenvironments for Drug Screening.Advanced healthcare materials · 2023Article
- Human Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell-Derived Neural Progenitor Cells Produce Distinct Neural 3D In Vitro Models Depending on Alginate/Gellan Gum/Laminin Hydrogel Blend Properties.Advanced healthcare materials · 2021Article
- Platforms for Personalized Polytherapeutics Discovery in COVID-19.Journal of molecular biology · 2021Review
- Application of 3D bioprinting in the prevention and the therapy for human diseases.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2021Review
- Tackling Current Biomedical Challenges With Frontier Biofabrication and Organ-On-A-Chip Technologies.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2021Review
- SARS-CoV-2-related vascular injury: mechanisms, imaging and models.Microphysiological systems · 2021Article
- Bioprinting Neural Systems to Model Central Nervous System Diseases.Advanced functional materials · 2020Review
- Improving Bioprinted Volumetric Tumor Microenvironments In Vitro.Trends in cancer · 2020Review
- Advances in Hybrid Fabrication toward Hierarchical Tissue Constructs.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2020Review
- Bioengineering tools to speed up the discovery and preclinical testing of vaccines for SARS-CoV-2 and therapeutic agents for COVID-19.Theranostics · 2020Review
- Instrumented Microphysiological Systems for Real-Time Measurement and Manipulation of Cellular Electrochemical Processes.iScience · 2019Review
- Dynamic three-dimensional coculture model: The future of tissue engineering applied to the peripheral nervous system.Journal of tissue engineeringArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Microphysiological systems (MPSs) have been proposed as an improved tool to recreate the complex biological features of the native niche with the goal of improving in vitro-in vivo extrapolation. In just over a decade, MPS technologies have progressed from single-tissue chips to multitissue plates with integrated pumps for perfusion. Concurrently, techniques for biofabrication of complex 3D constructs for regenerative medicine and 3D in vitro models have evolved into a diverse toolbox for micrometer-scale deposition of cells and cell-laden bioinks. However, as the complexity of biological models increases, experimental throughput is often compromised. This review discusses the existing disparity between MPS complexity and throughput, then examines an MPS-terminated biofabrication line to identify the hurdles and potential approaches to overcoming this disparity.
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.