ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2006
Use of electrochemical DNA biosensors for rapid molecular identification of uropathogens in clinical urine specimens.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 75 papers.
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
75 citing papers in PubMed, 209 citations in OpenAlex.
- A biosensor platform for rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing directly from clinical samples.The Journal of urology · 2011Trial
- Integrated iPRISM Direct-on-Urine Platform for Rapid UTI Diagnosis in a Double-Blind Clinical Trial.ACS measurement science au · 2026Article
- Bridging oral and systemic health: exploring pathogenesis, biomarkers, and diagnostic innovations in periodontal disease.Infection · 2025Review
- Emerging Biomimetic Sensor Technologies for the Detection of Pathogenic Bacteria: A Commercial Viability Study.ACS omega · 2024Review
- Nanobiosensors: Concepts and Emerging Clinical Applications.Pharmaceutical nanotechnology · 2024Review
- Liquid NanoBiosensors Enable One-Pot Electrochemical Detection of Bacteria in Complex Matrices.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2023Article
- Article
- Transportation protocols for accurate assessment of microbial burden classification using molecular methods.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Highly Sensitive Electrochemical Sensor for Diagnosis of Diabetic Ketoacidosis (DKA) by Measuring Ketone Bodies in Urine.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Cranberry Proanthocyanidins-PANI Nanocomposite for the Detection of Bacteria Associated with Urinary Tract Infections.Biosensors · 2021Article
- Towards Easy-to-Use Bacteria Sensing: Modeling and Simulation of a New Environmental Impedimetric Biosensor in Fluids.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Article
- Integration of FISH and Microfluidics.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2021Article
- Non-Invasive Electrochemical Biosensors Operating in Human Physiological Fluids.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- DNA Microsystems for Biodiagnosis.Micromachines · 2020Review
- Rapid bacterial detection and antibiotic susceptibility testing in whole blood using one-step, high throughput blood digital PCR.Lab on a chip · 2020Article
- An electrochemical biosensor for prostate cancer biomarker detection using graphene oxide-gold nanostructures.Engineering in life sciences · 2019Article
- Multifunctional Paper-Based Analytical Device for In Situ Cultivation and Screening of Escherichia coli Infections.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Identification and Antibiotic-Susceptibility Profiling of Infectious Bacterial Agents: A Review of Current and Future Trends.Biotechnology journal · 2019Review
- Designing a new biosensor "DNA ELISA" to detect Escherichia coli using genomic DNA and comparison of this method to PCR-ELISA.Journal of enzyme inhibition and medicinal chemistry · 2018Article
15 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
We describe the first species-specific detection of bacterial pathogens in human clinical fluid samples using a microfabricated electrochemical sensor array. Each of the 16 sensors in the array consisted of three single-layer gold electrodes-working, reference, and auxiliary. Each of the working electrodes contained one representative from a library of capture probes, each specific for a clinically relevant bacterial urinary pathogen. The library included probes for Escherichia coli, Proteus mirabilis, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Enterocococcus spp., and the Klebsiella-Enterobacter group. A bacterial 16S rRNA target derived from single-step bacterial lysis was hybridized both to the biotin-modified capture probe on the sensor surface and to a second, fluorescein-modified detector probe. Detection of the target-probe hybrids was achieved through binding of a horseradish peroxidase (HRP)-conjugated anti-fluorescein antibody to the detector probe. Amperometric measurement of the catalyzed HRP reaction was obtained at a fixed potential of -200 mV between the working and reference electrodes. Species-specific detection of as few as 2,600 uropathogenic bacteria in culture, inoculated urine, and clinical urine samples was achieved within 45 min from the beginning of sample processing. In a feasibility study of this amperometric detection system using blinded clinical urine specimens, the sensor array had 100% sensitivity for direct detection of gram-negative bacteria without nucleic acid purification or amplification. Identification was demonstrated for 98% of gram-negative bacteria for which species-specific probes were available. When combined with a microfluidics-based sample preparation module, the integrated system could serve as a point-of-care device for rapid diagnosis of urinary tract infections.
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.