| Title |
Rapid prototyping and parametric optimization of plastic acoustofluidic devices for blood–bacteria separation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Biomedical Microdevices, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10544-017-0210-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
R. Silva, P. Dow, R. Dubay, C. Lissandrello, J. Holder, D. Densmore, J. Fiering |
| Abstract |
Acoustic manipulation has emerged as a versatile method for microfluidic separation and concentration of particles and cells. Most recent demonstrations of the technology use piezoelectric actuators to excite resonant modes in silicon or glass microchannels. Here, we focus on acoustic manipulation in disposable, plastic microchannels in order to enable a low-cost processing tool for point-of-care diagnostics. Unfortunately, the performance of resonant acoustofluidic devices in plastic is hampered by a lack of a predictive model. In this paper, we build and test a plastic blood-bacteria separation device informed by a design of experiments approach, parametric rapid prototyping, and screening by image-processing. We demonstrate that the new device geometry can separate bacteria from blood while operating at 275% greater flow rate as well as reduce the power requirement by 82%, while maintaining equivalent separation performance and resolution when compared to the previously published plastic acoustofluidic separation device. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 6 | 67% |
| Unknown | 3 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 78% |
| Scientists | 1 | 11% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 50 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 38% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 18% |
| Researcher | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Unknown | 10 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 20 | 40% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 6% |
| Chemical Engineering | 2 | 4% |
| Mathematics | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 16% |
| Unknown | 12 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 November 2023.
All research outputs
#3,060,023
of 25,362,278 outputs
Outputs from Biomedical Microdevices
#41
of 813 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,842
of 327,136 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biomedical Microdevices
#3
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,362,278 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 813 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 327,136 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.