ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Slip Risk on Surfaces Made with 3D Printing Technology.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Use of Recycled Plastic Waste from Electrical Cable Recycling Processes as Fillers in Concrete for Paving Block Production and the Associated Slip Risk.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Pharmaceutical 3D Printing for Psychiatric Medications: Advanced Innovations in Taste Masking and Personalized Oral Drug Delivery.Pharmaceutical research · 2025Review
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
Abstract
Slip risk on surfaces used by humans or active in mechanisms is studied to mitigate its effects or harness its beneficial outcomes. This article presents pioneering research on the risk of surfaces created using 3D printing technology. The study examines three materials (Polylactic Acid, PLA; Polyethylene Terephthalate Glycol, PET-G; and Thermoplastic Polyurethane, TPU), considering three print head movement directions relative to the British Portable Skid Resistance Tester (BSRT) measurement direction. In addition, surface roughness tests were performed. Dry tests showed that the structure created by the printing direction perpendicular to the movement direction is the safest in terms of slip risk. The SRVs of the measured samples on a qualitative scale were classified on this scale as materials with low or extremely low slip risk (ranging from 55 to 90 SRV dry and 35 to 60 SRV wet). Referring to the influence of the type of material on the SRV, it was found that the safest material in terms of reducing the risk of slipping in dry conditions is TPU and, in wet conditions, PLA. During wet tests, the best properties that reduce the risk of slippage in most cases are shown by the printing direction on a horizontal plane at an angle of 45° to the direction of movement. Statistical analysis showed that the printing direction and roughness do not have a statistically significant effect on the SRV, but the type of material and the type of method (dry and wet) and their interaction have a significant effect.
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.