ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2026
From digital to physical model: testing of a workflow for case-specific 3D-printed bone simulants.
Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bone simulants are used for a variety of purposes in wound ballistic experimentation. Synthetic simulants have several advantages over biological (either human or animal) material. Generic synthetic simulants are available, but the shapes and sizes of these materials cannot cover the full range observed in human individuals. This is a disadvantage, e.g., in forensic reconstructions where accurate and case-specific simulants are often desirable. One way to circumvent this problem is to print bone simulants, based on scanned victims' data. The current study is intended to explore the feasibility of this method, find suitable materials, and determine optimal printer settings. For this purpose, two porcine scapulas and two porcine femurs were scanned with a Computed Tomography (CT) scanner and replicated with a 3D printer based on the scan data. Polylactic acid (PLA), thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU), and nylon-carbon fibre (PA6-CF) were used as printing materials. Cancellous bone was replicated by printing a honeycomb pattern with a 60% infill. Cortical bone was replicated by printing a rectilinear pattern with a 100% infill. Both the biological originals and their printed replicas were embedded in gelatine and shot with 6,35 mm Browning and .22 Long Rifle bullets. Penetration capacity, projectile deformation and fracture characteristics were compared. The results were most promising with the TPU prototypes. For the PLA and PA6-CF, the fracture characteristics and projectile deformation differed from those observed with the biological originals. Also, the penetration depth into the gelatine behind the bone simulants was lower with these materials.
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.