Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32596534›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of bioprinting2019

Three-dimensional-printing for microfluidics or the other way around?

Yi Zhang

Erratum issuedAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of bioprinting, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. 3D-printed Bioreactors forInternational journal of bioprinting · 2020
    Review
  12. Call for special issues.International journal of bioprinting · 2019
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Yi ZhangSingapore 3D-Printing Center, HP-NTU Digital Manufacturing Corporate Lab, School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As microfluidic devices are designed to tackle more intricate tasks, the architecture of microfluidic devices becomes more complex, and more sophisticated fabrication techniques are in demand. Therefore, it is sensible to fabricate microfluidic devices by three-dimensional (3D)-printing, which is well-recognized for its unique ability to monolithically fabricate complex structures using a near-net-shape additive manufacturing process. Many 3D-printed microfluidic platforms have been demonstrated but can 3D-printed microfluidics meet the demanding requirements in today's context, and has microfluidics truly benefited from 3D-printing? In contrast to 3D-printed microfluidics, some go the other way around and exploit microfluidics for 3D-printing. Many innovative printing strategies have been made possible with microfluidics-enabled 3D-printing, although the limitations are also largely evident. In this perspective article, we take a look at the current development in 3D-printed microfluidics and microfluidics-enabled 3D printing with a strong focus on the limitations of the two technologies. More importantly, we attempt to identify the innovations required to overcome these limitations and to develop new high-value applications that would make a scientific and social impact in the future.

Indexed as

3D-printingBioprintingMicrofluidics

Identifiers

PMID32596534
PMCPMC7294695

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.