ArticleiScience2025
Scratching in style: 3D printers as plotters for automated and complex wound-healing assays.
Article in iScience, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Scratch wound healing assays remain widely used 2D migration assays to study the behavior of cultured cells. They are easy and cost-effective, yet poorly standardized in geometric dimensions (e.g., scratch width and line straightness), especially when performed manually. Conventional assays typically apply a single scratch, restricting analysis to a subset of the cells in a well rather than the full population. Commercial "scratch-makers" exist but are expensive and lack support for complex patterns. Complex scratch formations would enable assessment across wells and evaluation of migration-associated protein expression. Accordingly, we developed an open-source, cost-effective method that repurposes widely available 3D printers as 2D plotters to generate repeatable scratch dimensions with different pipette tips. The system operates under culture-hood conditions across common plate formats from multiple manufacturers. We validate reproducible and consistent scratch parameters and demonstrate how programmable patterns can broaden
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.