Additive fabrication for NMR probe builders.

Jose L Uribe, Annie V McAllister, Rachel W Martin

Abstract readReview

In one paragraph

Review in Progress in nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Jose L UribeDepartment of Chemistry, University of California, Irvine 92697-2025, United States of America.

Annie V McAllisterDepartment of Chemistry, University of California, Irvine 92697-2025, United States of America.

Rachel W MartinDepartment of Chemistry, University of California, Irvine 92697-2025, United States of America; Department of Molecular Biology and Biochemistry, University of California, Irvine 92697-3900, United States of America. Electronic address: rwmartin@uci.edu.

Funding

Solid-state NMR methods for investigating native and aggregated eye lens proteinsR01EY021514 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI MARTIN, RACHEL WAGNER · 2011 to 2022

$2.8M

NEI NIH HHS R01 EY021514

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Three-dimensional (3D) printing has emerged as a transformative technology for nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) instrumentation, offering flexibility in the design and fabrication of custom tools that enhance experimental capabilities. Additive manufacturing has made it possible for many NMR labs to build their own magic angle spinning assemblies, sample handling devices, and other critical components. We summarize common 3D printing techniques, such as fused deposition modeling (FDM) and stereolithography (SLA) for polymers, along with metal printing methods like selective laser melting. By facilitating rapid prototyping, 3D printing accelerates the development and optimization of NMR systems, as well as bypassing traditional manufacturing constraints. This review also discusses perspectives on the future of 3D printing in NMR and related methods, providing cost-effective, in-house solutions that increase participation, allow for sharing and remixing of innovations, and broaden applications across chemical, biological, and materials research.

Indexed as

3D printingAdditive fabricationNMR instrumentationNMR probeRadiofrequency circuit

Identifiers

PMID41352866

DOI10.1016/j.pnmrs.2025.101563

PMCPMC12681755

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

LicenceTDM

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.