ArticleInternational journal of bioprinting2021
Toward Mass Customization Through Additive Manufacturing: An Automated Design Pipeline for Respiratory Protective Equipment Validated Against 205 Faces.
Article in International journal of bioprinting, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Respiratory protective equipment (RPE) is traditionally designed through anthropometric sizing to enable mass production. However, this can lead to long-standing problems of low-compliance, severe skin trauma, and higher fit test failure rates among certain demographic groups, particularly females and non-white ethnic groups. Additive manufacturing could be a viable solution to produce custom-fitted RPE, but the manual design process is time-consuming, cost-prohibitive and unscalable for mass customization. This paper proposes an automated design pipeline which generates the computer-aided design models of custom-fit RPE from unprocessed three-dimensional (3D) facial scans. The pipeline successfully processed 197 of 205 facial scans with <2 min/scan. The average and maximum geometric error of the mask were 0.62 mm and 2.03 mm, respectively. No statistically significant differences in mask fit were found between male and female, Asian and White, White and Others, Healthy and Overweight, Overweight and Obese, Middle age, and Senior groups.
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.