Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37308526›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2023

Fabricating a dielectrophoretic microfluidic device using 3D-printed moulds and silver conductive paint.

Shayan Valijam, Daniel P G Nilsson, Dmitry Malyshev, Rasmus Öberg, Alireza Salehi, Magnus Andersson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Shayan ValijamFaculty of Electrical Engineering, K. N. Toosi University of Technology, Tehran, 1631714191, Iran.
Daniel P G NilssonDepartment of Physics, Umeå University, 901 87, Umeå, Sweden.
Dmitry MalyshevDepartment of Physics, Umeå University, 901 87, Umeå, Sweden.
Rasmus ÖbergDepartment of Physics, Umeå University, 901 87, Umeå, Sweden.
Alireza SalehiFaculty of Electrical Engineering, K. N. Toosi University of Technology, Tehran, 1631714191, Iran.
Magnus AnderssonDepartment of Physics, Umeå University, 901 87, Umeå, Sweden. magnus.andersson@umu.se.

Funding

Kempestiftelserna JCK-1916.2Swedish Department of Defence 470-A400821Vetenskapsrådet 2019-04016
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dielectrophoresis is an electric field-based technique for moving neutral particles through a fluid. When used for particle separation, dielectrophoresis has many advantages compared to other methods, like providing label-free operation with greater control of the separation forces. In this paper, we design, build, and test a low-voltage dielectrophoretic device using a 3D printing approach. This lab-on-a-chip device fits on a microscope glass slide and incorporates microfluidic channels for particle separation. First, we use multiphysics simulations to evaluate the separation efficiency of the prospective device and guide the design process. Second, we fabricate the device in PDMS (polydimethylsiloxane) by using 3D-printed moulds that contain patterns of the channels and electrodes. The imprint of the electrodes is then filled with silver conductive paint, making a 9-pole comb electrode. Lastly, we evaluate the separation efficiency of our device by introducing a mixture of 3 μm and 10 μm polystyrene particles and tracking their progression. Our device is able to efficiently separate these particles when the electrodes are energized with ±12 V at 75 kHz. Overall, our method allows the fabrication of cheap and effective dielectrophoretic microfluidic devices using commercial off-the-shelf equipment.

Identifiers

PMID37308526
PMCPMC10260938

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.