Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33803689›Full record

ReviewMicromachines2021

Fabrication Methods for Microfluidic Devices: An Overview.

Simon M Scott, Zulfiqur Ali

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Micromachines, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 166 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
166citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

166 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review

106 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

2 authors.

Simon M ScottHealthcare Innovation Centre, School of Health and Life Sciences, Teesside University, Middlesbrough, Tees Valley TS1 3BX, UK.
Zulfiqur AliHealthcare Innovation Centre, School of Health and Life Sciences, Teesside University, Middlesbrough, Tees Valley TS1 3BX, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9884-8146

Funding

European Commission 644856Sixth Framework Programme 34256
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Microfluidic devices offer the potential to automate a wide variety of chemical and biological operations that are applicable for diagnostic and therapeutic operations with higher efficiency as well as higher repeatability and reproducibility. Polymer based microfluidic devices offer particular advantages including those of cost and biocompatibility. Here, we describe direct and replication approaches for manufacturing of polymer microfluidic devices. Replications approaches require fabrication of mould or master and we describe different methods of mould manufacture, including mechanical (micro-cutting; ultrasonic machining), energy-assisted methods (electrodischarge machining, micro-electrochemical machining, laser ablation, electron beam machining, focused ion beam (FIB) machining), traditional micro-electromechanical systems (MEMS) processes, as well as mould fabrication approaches for curved surfaces. The approaches for microfluidic device fabrications are described in terms of low volume production (casting, lamination, laser ablation, 3D printing) and high-volume production (hot embossing, injection moulding, and film or sheet operations).

Indexed as

3D printingdiagnosticshot embossinginjection mouldinglab-on-a-chiplaminatelaser ablationmicro- and nanofabricationmicrofluidicsmicromachiningprinted electronicsroll-to-roll (R2R) processing

Identifiers

PMID33803689
PMCPMC8002879

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.