ReviewPolymers2023
Geopolymer Materials for Extrusion-Based 3D-Printing: A Review.
Review in Polymers, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- 3D-Printed Geopolymer Composite Truss Beam: Experimental Verification of Manufacturing and Load-Bearing Capacity in Four-Point Bending.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Cost-Effective 3D Printing of Geopolymer Concrete Enhanced by Na-CMC as a Viscosity Modifier.ACS omega · 2026Article
- Review
- Influence of Environmental Exposures on the Mechanical Performance and Durability of 3D-Printed Cementitious and Alkali-Activated Composites.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Fresh-State Characteristics of Geopolymer Mortars for 3D Printing: Mix Design, Rheology and Early-Age Performance.Polymers · 2026Review
- An Experimental Study and FEM-Based Analysis for Road Safety Barriers: Additively Manufactured PLA-Geopolymer Hybrid Composites.Polymers · 2026Article
- Geopolymer Materials for Additive Manufacturing: Chemical Stability, Leaching Behaviour, and Radiological Safety.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Comparison of Porosity and Thermal Conductivity of Concrete and Alkali-Activated Hybrid Binders in 3D-Printed Fiber-Reinforced Foamed Composites.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Upscaling of Copper Slag-Based Geopolymer to 3D Printing Technology.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- 3D printed scaffolds of biosilica and spongin from marine sponges: analysis of genotoxicity and cytotoxicity for bone tissue repair.Bioprocess and biosystems engineering · 2024Article
- 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper examines how extrusion-based 3D-printing technology is evolving, utilising geopolymers (GPs) as sustainable inorganic aluminosilicate materials. Particularly, the current state of 3D-printing geopolymers is critically examined in this study from the perspectives of the production process, printability need, mix design, early-age material features, and sustainability, with an emphasis on the effects of various elements including the examination of the fresh and hardened properties of 3D-printed geopolymers, depending on the matrix composition, reinforcement type, curing process, and printing configuration. The differences and potential of two-part and one-part geopolymers are also analysed. The applications of advanced printable geopolymer materials and products are highlighted, along with some specific examples. The primary issues, outlooks, and paths for future efforts necessary to advance this technology are identified.
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.