↓ Skip to main content

Assessment of biocompatibility of 3D printed photopolymers using zebrafish embryo toxicity assays

Overview of attention for article published in Lab on a Chip - Miniaturisation for Chemistry & Biology, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
8 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
56 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
125 Mendeley
Title
Assessment of biocompatibility of 3D printed photopolymers using zebrafish embryo toxicity assays
Published in
Lab on a Chip - Miniaturisation for Chemistry & Biology, January 2016
DOI 10.1039/c5lc01374g
Pubmed ID
Authors

N. P. Macdonald, F. Zhu, C. J. Hall, J. Reboud, P. S. Crosier, E. E. Patton, D. Wlodkowic, J. M. Cooper

Abstract

3D printing has emerged as a rapid and cost-efficient manufacturing technique to enable the fabrication of bespoke, complex prototypes. If the technology is to have a significant impact in biomedical applications, such as drug discovery and molecular diagnostics, the devices produced must be biologically compatible to enable their use with established reference assays and protocols. In this work we demonstrate that we can adapt the Fish Embryo Test (FET) as a new method to quantify the toxicity of 3D printed microfluidic devices. We assessed the biocompatibility of four commercially available 3D printing polymers (VisiJetCrystal EX200, Watershed 11122XC, Fototec SLA 7150 Clear and ABSplus P-430), through the observation of key developmental markers in the developing zebrafish embryos. Results show all of the photopolymers to be highly toxic to the embryos, resulting in fatality, although we do demonstrate that post-printing treatment of Fototec 7150 makes it suitable for zebrafish culture within the FET.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 125 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 123 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 40 32%
Student > Master 17 14%
Researcher 17 14%
Student > Bachelor 11 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 5%
Other 13 10%
Unknown 21 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 34 27%
Chemistry 20 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 4%
Other 14 11%
Unknown 28 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 07 December 2016.
All research outputs
#946,470
of 12,347,162 outputs
Outputs from Lab on a Chip - Miniaturisation for Chemistry & Biology
#205
of 3,838 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,308
of 325,339 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Lab on a Chip - Miniaturisation for Chemistry & Biology
#9
of 122 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,347,162 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,838 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. 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 325,339 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 122 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.