Dataset Information

A quantitative analysis of 3D printed face shields and masks during COVID-19 [version 1; peer review: 2 approved]

ABSTRACT: In response to shortages in personal protective equipment (PPE) during the COVID-19 pandemic, makers, community groups and manufacturers around the world utilised 3D printing to fabricate items, including face shields and face masks for healthcare workers and the broader community. In reaction to both local and global needs, numerous designs emerged and were shared online. In this paper, 37 face shields and 31 face masks suitable for fused filament fabrication were analysed from a fabrication perspective, documenting factors such as filament use, time to print and geometric qualities. 3D print times for similar designs varied by several hours, meaning some designs could be produced in higher volumes. Overall, the results show that face shields were approximately twice as fast to 3D print compared to face masks and used approximately half as much filament. Additionally, a face shield typically required 1.5 parts to be 3D printed, whereas face masks required 5 3D printed parts. However, by quantifying the print times, filament use, 3D printing costs, part dimensions, number of parts and total volume of each design, the wide variations within each product category could be tracked and evaluated. This data and objective analysis will help makers, manufacturers, regulatory bodies and researchers consolidate the 3D printing response to COVID-19 and optimise the ongoing strategy to combat supply chain shortages now and in future healthcare crises.

SUBMITTER: Novak J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7391928 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Introduction: Health literacy on the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) affects people’s capability to ascertain their health and health care quality during the pandemic. The objective of this study was to determine the levels of health literacy about COVID-19 vaccines and vaccinations (Vaccines and Vaccinations literacy-VL) in the Indonesian adult general population, assessing the perceptions of the respondents about current adult immunization and beliefs about vaccinations in general, and analyzing correlations of these variables with the VL levels. Methods: A cross-sectional study using a rapid survey was administered via the Internet. Data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics; the internal consistency of the VL scales was evaluated using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient; the inter-correlation between the functional and interactive-critical VL questions, the underlying components (factors) and each question’s load on the components were identified using a Principal Component Analysis (PCA). An alpha level lesser than 0.05 was considered significant. Results: Responses to functional- and interactive/ critical- VL questions were acceptable and showed internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.817 and 0.699, respectively), lowest values observed were 0.806 for functional scale and 0.640 for the interactive-critical scale. The PCA demonstrated that there were two components accounting for 52.45% of the total variability. Approximately 60% of respondents were females (n=686). Almost all respondents used the internet to seek information regarding COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccinations. Many used at least one social media actively with 74.4% of respondents sometimes believing the validity of this information. Conclusions: High scores were observed in both functional- and interactive/ critical-VL, and were quite in a balance between sexes in the prior VL and higher in females for the latter; these were also closely related to the educational level and age group. It is crucial to increase public health literacy in managing the pandemic.

Project description:Mounting evidence indicates that worldwide, innovation systems are increasing unsustainable. Equally, concerns about inequities in the science and innovation process, and in access to its benefits, continue. Against a backdrop of growing health, economic and scientific challenges global stakeholders are urgently seeking to spur innovation and maximize the just distribution of benefits for all. Open Science collaboration (OS) - comprising a variety of approaches to increase open, public, and rapid mobilization of scientific knowledge - is seen to be one of the most promising ways forward. Yet, many decision-makers hesitate to construct policy to support the adoption and implementation of OS without access to substantive, clear and reliable evidence. In October 2017, international thought-leaders gathered at an Open Science Leadership Forum in the Washington DC offices of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to share their views on what successful Open Science looks like. Delegates from developed and developing nations, national governments, science agencies and funding bodies, philanthropy, researchers, patient organizations and the biotechnology, pharma and artificial intelligence (AI) industries discussed the outcomes that would rally them to invest in OS, as well as wider issues of policy and implementation. This first of two reports, summarizes delegates' views on what they believe OS will deliver in terms of research, innovation and social impact in the life sciences. Through open and collaborative process over the next months, we will translate these success outcomes into a toolkit of quantitative and qualitative indicators to assess when, where and how open science collaborations best advance research, innovation and social benefit. Ultimately, this work aims to develop and openly share tools to allow stakeholders to evaluate and re-invent their innovation ecosystems, to maximize value for the global public and patients, and address long-standing questions about the mechanics of innovation.

Dataset Information

A quantitative analysis of 3D printed face shields and masks during COVID-19 [version 1; peer review: 2 approved]

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets