↓ Skip to main content

Fabrication approaches for the creation of physical models from microscopy data

Overview of attention for article published in 3D Printing in Medicine, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
12 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Fabrication approaches for the creation of physical models from microscopy data
Published in
3D Printing in Medicine, February 2017
DOI 10.1186/s41205-017-0011-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Benjamin L. Cox, Nathan Schumacher, John Konieczny, Issac Reifschneider, Thomas R. Mackie, Marisa S. Otegui, Kevin W. Eliceiri

Abstract

Three-dimensional (3D) printing has become a useful method of fabrication for many clinical applications. It is also a technique that is becoming increasingly accessible, as the price of the necessary tools and supplies decline. One emerging, and unreported, application for 3D printing is to aid in the visualization of 3D imaging data by creating physical models of select structures of interest. Presented here are three physical models that were fabricated from three different 3D microscopy datasets. Different methods of fabrication and imaging techniques were used in each case. Each model is presented in detail. This includes the imaging modality used to capture the raw data, the software used to create any computer models and the 3D printing tools used to create each model. Despite the differences in their creation, these examples follow a simple common workflow that is also detailed. Following these approaches, one can easily make 3D printed models from 3D microscopy datasets utilizing off the shelf commercially available software and hardware.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 12 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 2 17%
Researcher 2 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 17%
Other 1 8%
Student > Bachelor 1 8%
Other 1 8%
Unknown 3 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 2 17%
Environmental Science 1 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 8%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 8%
Other 3 25%
Unknown 3 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 16 March 2017.
All research outputs
#18,535,896
of 22,957,478 outputs
Outputs from 3D Printing in Medicine
#97
of 111 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#316,439
of 428,400 outputs
Outputs of similar age from 3D Printing in Medicine
#3
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,957,478 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 111 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 428,400 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.