ArticleMicromachines2020
Gaining Micropattern Fidelity in an NOA81 Microsieve Laser Ablation Process.
Article in Micromachines, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nanogroove-Induced Enhancement of Neural Spike Activity in Stem Cell-Derived Networks.Micromachines · 2026Article
- Nervous System-on-Chip: Innovative Microfluidic Platform to Compartmentalize hiPSC-Derived Neural Networks.Micromachines · 2026Article
- Editorial for the Special Issue on Microfluidic Brain-on-a-Chip.Micromachines · 2021Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
We studied the micropattern fidelity of a Norland Optical Adhesive 81 (NOA81) microsieve made by soft-lithography and laser micromachining. Ablation opens replicated cavities, resulting in three-dimensional (3D) micropores. We previously demonstrated that microsieves can capture cells by passive pumping. Flow, capture yield, and cell survival depend on the control of the micropore geometry and must yield high reproducibility within the device and from device to device. We investigated the NOA81 film thickness, the laser pulse repetition rate, the number of pulses, and the beam focusing distance. For NOA81 films spin-coated between 600 and 1200 rpm, the pulse number controls the breaching of films to form the pore's aperture and dominates the process. Pulse repetition rates between 50 and 200 Hz had no observable influence. We also explored laser focal plane to substrate distance to find the most effective ablation conditions. Scanning electron micrographs (SEM) of focused ion beam (FIB)-cut cross sections of the NOA81 micropores and inverted micropore copies in polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) show a smooth surface topology with minimal debris. Our studies reveal that the combined process allows for a 3D micropore quality from device to device with a large enough process window for biological studies.
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.