ReviewMicromachines2021
Review of Design Considerations for Brain-on-a-Chip Models.
Review in Micromachines, 2021. 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.
- Microfluidic Systems to Mimic the Blood-Brain Barrier: from Market to Engineering Challenges and Perspectives.ACS biomaterials science & engineering · 2025Review
- A Biomimetic Human Multi-Cellular In Vitro Model of the Blood-Brain Barrier.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Review
- Tailoring epilepsy treatment: personalized micro-physiological systems illuminate individual drug responses.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2024Review
- Models for barrier understanding in health and disease in lab-on-a-chips.Tissue barriers · 2024Review
- Modeling the neuroimmune system in Alzheimer's and Parkinson's diseases.Journal of neuroinflammation · 2024Review
- Review
- Modeling Brain Vasculature Immune Interactions In Vitro.Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in medicine · 2023Review
- Blood-Brain Barrier Breakdown in Neuroinflammation: Current In Vitro Models.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Fabrication of plane-type axon guidance substrates by applying diamond-like carbon thin film deposition.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Microenvironments Matter: Advances in Brain-on-Chip.Biosensors · 2023Review
- Organ-on-a-chip meets artificial intelligence in drug evaluation.Theranostics · 2023Review
- Organ-On-A-Chip Models of the Blood-Brain Barrier: Recent Advances and Future Prospects.Small (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany) · 2022Review
- Promising Strategies for the Development of Advanced In Vitro Models with High Predictive Power in Ischaemic Stroke Research.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Vascularizing the brainiScience · 2022Review
- Editorial for the Special Issue on Microfluidic Brain-on-a-Chip.Micromachines · 2021Article
- Brain-on-a-Chip: Characterizing the next generation of advancedAPL bioengineering · 2021Article
- Lab-on-a-Chip Platforms as Tools for Drug Screening in Neuropathologies Associated with Blood-Brain Barrier Alterations.Biomolecules · 2021Review
- Modeling the blood-brain barrier for treatment of central nervous system (CNS) diseases.Journal of tissue engineeringReview
- Current progress and challenges in the development of brain tissue models: How to grow up the changeable brain in vitro?Journal of tissue engineeringReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In recent years, the need for sophisticated human in vitro models for integrative biology has motivated the development of organ-on-a-chip platforms. Organ-on-a-chip devices are engineered to mimic the mechanical, biochemical and physiological properties of human organs; however, there are many important considerations when selecting or designing an appropriate device for investigating a specific scientific question. Building microfluidic Brain-on-a-Chip (BoC) models from the ground-up will allow for research questions to be answered more thoroughly in the brain research field, but the design of these devices requires several choices to be made throughout the design development phase. These considerations include the cell types, extracellular matrix (ECM) material(s), and perfusion/flow considerations. Choices made early in the design cycle will dictate the limitations of the device and influence the end-point results such as the permeability of the endothelial cell monolayer, and the expression of cell type-specific markers. To better understand why the engineering aspects of a microfluidic BoC need to be influenced by the desired biological environment, recent progress in microfluidic BoC technology is compared. This review focuses on perfusable blood-brain barrier (BBB) and neurovascular unit (NVU) models with discussions about the chip architecture, the ECM used, and how they relate to the in vivo human brain. With increased knowledge on how to make informed choices when selecting or designing BoC models, the scientific community will benefit from shorter development phases and platforms curated for their application.
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.