Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39050479›Full record

ReviewHeliyon2024

Towards the development of foods 3D printer: Trends and technologies for foods printing.

Husam A Neamah, Joseph Tandio

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Heliyon, 2024. 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. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
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

2 authors.

Husam A NeamahDepartment of Electrical and Mechatronics Engineering, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, 4028, Hungary.
Joseph TandioMechatronic Systems Design, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, 5612, Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

3D printing of food materials is among the innovations that could revolutionize people's food choices and consumption. Food innovation and production have advanced considerably in recent years and its market has shown rapid annual expansion. Printing food technologies are considered as a potential solution for producing customized foods such as military food, and astronaut food. The printable food ink material still lacks standardization and superior extrusion process compared to other 3D printing industries. This review paper aimed to provide a comprehensive review of the current foods 3D printing and the latest technology in certain terms and with its concrete applications. In particular, the following issues are discussed: the printing techniques, exudations classes, business prospects, technologies, printing parameters, food materials, safety, and challenges and limitations of food 3D printing along with possible improvement recommendations. Significant printing parameters have been summarized and the safety of the food printing has been evaluated. Moreover, this article also contains a detailed, tabular evaluation of technical approaches employed across researched based and commercially available systems. One of the major limitations that need to be resolved was standardization of food printing safety.

Indexed as

Additive manufacturingExtrusion-based 3D printingFood inkFood's 3D printing

Identifiers

PMID39050479
PMCPMC11268349

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.