ArticleACS omega2025
Printability of Bioinks: A Consolidated Definition for Additive Manufacturing.
Article in ACS omega, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- 3D-Printing of Magnetoactive Gelatin-Alginate Scaffolds.Pharmaceutics · 2026Article
- Machine-Learning-Assisted Quantitative Printability Assessment in Extrusion-Based Bioprinting-A Systems-Engineering Proof-of-Concept.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- MXene Bioinks for 3D Bioprinting: Design and Translation.Small (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany) · 2026Review
- Green and Scalable Manufacturing of Biodegradable Polymer Scaffolds: Solvent-Free Processing, Supercritical COPolymers · 2026Review
- 3D Printing with Tragacanth-Gum-Based Bioinks: A New Frontier in Bioprinting Materials.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Recent advances in multimodal foundation model-enabled peptide screening and optimization for smart biomaterials and functional tissue engineering.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence-assisted smart hydrogel bioinks in 3D bioprinting: design, optimization, and construct validation for functional tissue engineering.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Printability is a key concept extensively used in the context of bioinks for additive manufacturing. However, the absence of a universally accepted definition has led to inconsistencies in its application across studies. Some researchers use the term interchangeably with shape fidelity or shape accuracy, while others incorporate multiple aspects, including rheological properties and extrudability, into its definition. In some cases, the omission of cell viability further limits the scope of current research. As a result, studies that connect rheological properties to printability or employ physical and mathematical models to predict outcomes often fail to capture the complete manufacturing process due to the lack of definitional consistency. This review examines literature from 2011 to 2024, identifying key thematic clusters that contribute to a more robust understanding of printability. We propose an integrative definition that encompasses not only rheological properties across all stages of production but also geometry, shape fidelity, shape accuracy, and functionalitywith particular emphasis on cell viability. This broader definition aims to foster greater consensus and guide future applications of 3D printing in bioprinting and other additive manufacturing fields.
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.