ArticleBiomedical engineering online2005
Amplifier spurious input current components in electrode-electrolyte interface impedance measurements.
Article in Biomedical engineering online, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Targeted cell detection based on microchannel gating.Biomicrofluidics · 2007Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn Impedance Microbiology, the time during which the measuring equipment is connected to the bipolar cells is rather long, usually between 6 to 24 hrs for microorganisms with duplication times in the order of less than one hour and concentrations ranging from 10(1) to 10(7) [CFU/ml]. Under these conditions, the electrode-electrolyte interface impedance may show a slow drift of about 2%/hr. By and large, growth curves superimposed on such drift do not stabilize, are less reproducible, and keep on distorting all over the measurement of the temporal reactive or resistive records due to interface changes, in turn originated in bacterial activity. This problem has been found when growth curves were obtained by means of impedance analyzers or with impedance bridges using different types of operational amplifiers.
methodsSuspecting that the input circuitry was the culprit of the deleterious effect, we used for that matter (a) ultra-low bias current amplifiers, (b) isolating relays for the selection of cells, and (c) a shorter connection time, so that the relays were maintained opened after the readings, to bring down such spurious drift to a negligible value. Bacterial growth curves were obtained in order to test their quality.
resultsIt was demonstrated that the drift decreases ten fold when the circuit remained connected to the cell for a short time between measurements, so that the distortion became truly negligible. Improvement due to better-input amplifiers was not as good as by reducing the connection time. Moreover, temperature effects were insignificant with a regulation of +/- 0.2 [ degrees C]. Frequency did not influence either.
conclusionThe drift originated either at the dc input bias offset current (Ios) of the integrated circuits, or in discrete transistors connected directly to the electrodes immersed in the cells, depending on the particular circuit arrangement. Reduction of the connection time was the best countermeasure.
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.