ArticleJournal of clinical laboratory analysis2008
Rapid saliva processing techniques for near real-time analysis of salivary steroids and protein.
Article in Journal of clinical laboratory analysis, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of filtration and alpha-amylase depletion on salivary biochemical composition measurements.PloS one · 2023Article
- Pretreatment Methods for Human Nasopharyngeal Swabs to Increase the Signal to Noise Ratio of High Sensitivity Immunoassays.ACS measurement science au · 2022Article
- Assessing the neuroendocrine stress response in the functional neuroimaging context.NeuroImage · 2009Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPoint-of-care (POC) measurements using saliva samples have immense potential to assess systemic health and wellbeing, but sample viscosity and contaminants can affect analyses. We sought a portable clean-up method for whole saliva appropriate for use with POC measurement techniques such as biosensors.
methodsWhole saliva from each of 13 male subjects was split into 5 fractions. Each fraction was treated with a different clean-up process: a freeze-thaw-centrifuge (FTC) step; centrifugation alone; or passage through a Mini-UniPrep polyethersulfone filter, cotton Salivette, or foam Oracol device. Following clean-up, each subject's treated saliva fractions were assayed for cortisol, testosterone, dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA), and protein concentrations. The effects of clean-up methods on nonspecific binding (NSB) in a biosensor were also assessed.
resultsCompared with FTC, no analytes were affected by centrifugation alone. Cotton Salivettes significantly altered all analytes, with increases in cortisol (+64%), testosterone (+126%), and DHEA (off-scale) levels, and decreased protein (-21%) and biosensor NSB (-75%). Oracol foam devices decreased DHEA levels by 28%. Mini-UniPrep filtration decreased testosterone (-45%) and DHEA (-66%) concentrations while increasing cortisol (+40%).
conclusionNo method was optimal for all analytes, highlighting the need for validation of saliva treatment methods before their adoption in rapid POC analyses.
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.