ArticleMicromachines2021
Characterization and Evaluation of 3D-Printed Connectors for Microfluidics.
Article in Micromachines, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
3D printing is regarded as a useful tool for the fabrication of microfluidic connectors to overcome the challenges of time consumption, clogging, poor alignment and bulky fixtures existing for current interconnections. 3D-printed connectors without any additional components can be directly printed to substrate with an orifice by UV-assisted coaxial printing. This paper further characterized and evaluated 3D-printed connectors fabricated by the proposed method. A process window with an operable combination of flow rates was identified. The outer flow rate could control the inner channel dimensions of 3D-printed connectors, which were expected to achieve less geometric mismatch of flow paths in microfluidic interfaces. The achieved smallest inner channel diameter was around 120 µm. Furthermore, the withstood pressure of 3D-printed connectors was evaluated to exceed 450 kPa, which could enable microfluidic chips to work at normal pressure.
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.