ReviewPolymers2022
3D Printed and Conventional Membranes-A Review.
Review in Polymers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 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
22 citing papers in PubMed, 74 citations in OpenAlex.
- Characterization and industrial application of a gyroid-shaped novel graphite and MoSScientific reports · 2026Article
- Article
- Interfacial electroneutrality controls transport of asymmetric salts through charge-patterned mosaic membranes.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Sustainable circular biorefinery approach for novel building blocks and bioenergy production from algae using microbial fuel cell.Bioengineered · 2023Review
- Recent Progress of 3D Printing of Polymer Electrolyte Membrane-Based Fuel Cells for Clean Energy Generation.Polymers · 2023Review
- 3D-Printed Materials for Wastewater Treatment.JACS Au · 2023Review
- Light-oriented 3D printing of liquid crystal/photocurable resins and in-situ enhancement of mechanical performance.Nature communications · 2023Article
- Article
- 3D Printing Parameter Optimization Using Taguchi Approach to Examine Acrylonitrile Styrene Acrylate (ASA) Mechanical Properties.Polymers · 2022Article
- Experimental Study on Metal Parts under Variable 3D Printing and Sintering Orientations Using Bronze/PLA Hybrid Filament Coupled with Fused Filament Fabrication.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Article
- Investigation of Low-Cost FDM-Printed Polymers for Elevated-Temperature Applications.Polymers · 2022Article
- Artificial Intelligence-Empowered 3D and 4D Printing Technologies toward Smarter Biomedical Materials and Approaches.Polymers · 2022Review
- Rheological Behavior and Dynamic Mechanical Properties for Interpretation of Layer Adhesion in FDM 3D Printing.Polymers · 2022Article
- Development of Nanocoated Filaments for 3D Fused Deposition Modeling of Antibacterial and Antioxidant Materials.Polymers · 2022Article
- Influence of Thermal Annealing Temperatures on Powder Mould Effectiveness to Avoid Deformations in ABS and PLA 3D-Printed Parts.Polymers · 2022Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Polymer membranes are central to the proper operation of several processes used in a wide range of applications. The production of these membranes relies on processes such as phase inversion, stretching, track etching, sintering, or electrospinning. A novel and competitive strategy in membrane production is the use of additive manufacturing that enables the easier manufacture of tailored membranes. To achieve the future development of better membranes, it is necessary to compare this novel production process to that of more conventional techniques, and clarify the advantages and disadvantages. This review article compares a conventional method of manufacturing polymer membranes to additive manufacturing. A review of 3D printed membranes is also done to give researchers a reference guide. Membranes from these two approaches were compared in terms of cost, materials, structures, properties, performance. and environmental impact. Results show that very few membrane materials are used as 3D-printed membranes. Such membranes showed acceptable performance, better structures, and less environmental impact compared with those of conventional membranes.
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.