ArticleGEN biotechnology2022
Designing Cost-Effective Open-Source Multihead 3D Bioprinters.
Article in GEN biotechnology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Application of virtual reality in optimizing surgical outcomes and resident training in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: A randomized control trial.Investigative and clinical urology · 2025Trial
- The Allstruder: an open syringe extruder for every 3D printer.HardwareX · 2026Article
- Development of a microfluidic-assisted open-source 3D bioprinting system (MOS3S) for the engineering of hierarchical tissues.HardwareX · 2024Article
- The Enderstruder: An accessible open-source syringe extruder compatible with Ender series 3D printers.HardwareX · 2024Article
- Dynamically crosslinked thermoresponsive granular hydrogels.Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A · 2023Article
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
For the past decade, additive manufacturing has resulted in significant advances toward fabricating anatomic-size patient-specific scaffolds for tissue models and regenerative medicine. This can be attributed to the development of advanced bioinks capable of precise deposition of cells and biomaterials. The combination of additive manufacturing with advanced bioinks is enabling researchers to fabricate intricate tissue scaffolds that recreate the complex spatial distributions of cells and bioactive cues found in the human body. However, the expansion of this promising technique has been hampered by the high cost of commercially available bioprinters and proprietary software. In contrast, conventional three-dimensional (3D) printing has become increasingly popular with home hobbyists and caused an explosion of both low-cost thermoplastic 3D printers and open-source software to control the printer. In this study, we bring these benefits into the field of bioprinting by converting widely available and cost-effective 3D printers into fully functional, open-source, and customizable multihead bioprinters. These bioprinters utilize computer controlled volumetric extrusion, allowing bioinks with a wide range of flow properties to be bioprinted, including non-Newtonian bioinks. We demonstrate the practicality of this approach by designing bioprinters customized with multiple extruders, automatic bed leveling, and temperature controls for ∼$400 USD. These bioprinters were then used for
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.