Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19023463›Full record

ReviewLab on a chip2008

Towards non- and minimally instrumented, microfluidics-based diagnostic devices.

Bernhard Weigl, Gonzalo Domingo, Paul Labarre, Jay Gerlach

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Lab on a chip, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 73 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
73citing papers in PubMed
18.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

73 citing papers in PubMed, 259 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. From gut to mouth: salivary signatures of carcinogenic microbiota.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Microfluidic Point-of-Care Testing: Commercial Landscape and Future Directions.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2020
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

13 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Bernhard WeiglDiagnostic Development Group, PATH, 1455 NW Leary Way, Seattle, WA 98107, USA. bweigl@path.org
Gonzalo Domingo
Paul Labarre
Jay Gerlach
Program for Appropriate Technology in Health · US

Funding

TrainingU54EB007949 · NIBIB · PATH · PI STEELE, MATTHEW · 2007 to 2011
$8.6M
NIBIB NIH HHS U54 EB007949
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In many health care settings, it is uneconomical, impractical, or unaffordable to maintain and access a fully equipped diagnostics laboratory. Examples include home health care, developing-country health care, and emergency situations in which first responders are dealing with pandemics or biowarfare agent release. In those settings, fully disposable diagnostic devices that require no instrument support, reagent, or significant training are well suited. Although the only such technology to have found widespread adoption so far is the immunochromatographic rapid assay strip test, microfluidics holds promise to expand the range of assay technologies that can be performed in formats similar to that of a strip test. In this paper, we review progress toward development of disposable, low-cost, easy-to-use microfluidics-based diagnostics that require no instrument at all. We also present examples of microfluidic functional elements--including mixers, separators, and detectors--as well as complete microfluidic devices that function entirely without any moving parts and external power sources.

Indexed as

Diagnostic Techniques and ProceduresMicrofluidicsDisposable Equipment

Identifiers

PMID19023463
PMCPMC2776042
OpenAlexW1964597866

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.