Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33417859›Full record

ReviewCell2021

Bioprinting for the Biologist.

Andrew C Daly, Margaret E Prendergast, Alex J Hughes, Jason A Burdick

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cell, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 147 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
147citing 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

147 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Beyond printing: toward biologically informed biofabrication.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

87 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Andrew C DalyDepartment of Bioengineering, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA.
Margaret E PrendergastDepartment of Bioengineering, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA.
Alex J HughesDepartment of Bioengineering, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA.
Jason A BurdickDepartment of Bioengineering, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. Electronic address: burdick2@seas.upenn.edu.

Funding

A developmental engineering toolbox for large-scale tissue engineeringR35GM133380 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI Alex Hughes · 2019 to 2026
$3.3M
NIGMS NIH HHS R35 GM133380
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Building tissues from scratch to explore entirely new cell configurations could revolutionize fundamental understanding in biology. Bioprinting is an emerging technology to do this. Although typically applied to engineer tissues for therapeutic tissue repair or drug screening, there are many opportunities for bioprinting within biology, such as for exploring cellular crosstalk or cellular morphogenesis. The overall goals of this Primer are to provide an overview of bioprinting with the biologist in mind, outline the steps in extrusion bioprinting (the most widely used and accessible technology), and discuss alternative bioprinting technologies and future opportunities for bioprinting in biology.

Indexed as

BiologyBioprintingDiseaseHumansInkTissue Engineering

Identifiers

PMID33417859
PMCPMC10335003

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.