ArticleScientific reports2021
Air seal performance of personalized and statistically shaped 3D-printed face masks compared with market-available surgical and FFP2 masks.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Design, manufacturing, and testing of 3D-printed fittings for ergonomic helmet CPAP devices: a case study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Effective volume of rebreathed air during breathing with facepieces increases with protection class and decreases with ambient airflow.PloS one · 2024Article
- Facile method for 3D printing conformally onto uneven surfaces and its application to face masks.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Engineering Materials and Devices for the Prevention, Diagnosis, and Treatment of COVID-19 and Infectious Diseases.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Customized protective visors enabled by closed loop controlled 4D printing.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Development of Personalized Non-Invasive Ventilation Interfaces for Neonatal and Pediatric Application Using Additive Manufacturing.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has revealed alarming shortages of personal protective equipment for frontline healthcare professionals and the general public. Therefore, a 3D-printable mask frame was developed, and its air seal performance was evaluated and compared. Personalized masks (PM) based on individual face scans (n = 8) and a statistically shaped mask (SSM) based on a standardized facial soft tissue shape computed from 190 face scans were designed. Subsequently, the masks were additively manufactured, and in a second step, the PM and SSM were compared to surgical masks (SM) and FFP2 masks (FFP2) in terms of air seal performance. 3D-printed face models allowed for air leakage evaluation by measuring the pressure inside the mask in sealed and unsealed conditions during a breathing simulation. The PM demonstrated the lowest leak flow (p < 0.01) of inspired or expired unfiltered air of approximately 10.4 ± 16.4%, whereas the SM showed the highest (p < 0.01) leakage with 84.9 ± 7.7%. The FFP2 and SSM had similar values of 34.9 ± 18.5% leakage (p > 0.68). The developed framework allows for the time- and resource-efficient, on-demand, and in-house production of masks. For the best seal performance, an individually personalized mask design might be recommended.
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.