Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19495465›Full record

ArticleLab on a chip2009

Selective and tunable gradient device for cell culture and chemotaxis study.

Dongshin Kim, Mary A Lokuta, Anna Huttenlocher, David J Beebe

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Lab on a chip, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Microfluidic devices for neutrophil chemotaxis studies.Journal of translational medicine · 2020
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Quantitative analysis of B-lymphocyte migration directed by CXCL13.Integrative biology : quantitative biosciences from nano to macro · 2016
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Cell motility and drug gradients in the emergence of resistance to chemotherapy.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2013
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Microfluidic technologies for temporal perturbations of chemotaxis.Annual review of biomedical engineering · 2010
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
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.

Dongshin KimDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706, USA.
Mary A Lokuta
Anna Huttenlocher
David J Beebe

Funding

Study of Progenitor Regulation in Mouse Mammary GlandK25CA104162 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI BEEBE, DAVID J · 2004 to 2008
$751k
Microfluidic Channels for High Density, High Performance Culture AssaysR21CA122672 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI BEEBE, DAVID J · 2007 to 2008
$344k
NCI NIH HHS K25 CA104162NCI NIH HHS K25CA104162NCI NIH HHS R21 CA122672
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article describes a microfluidic device for cell culture and chemotaxis studies under various temporal and spatial concentration gradients of the medium or chemoattractant. Vertical membranes formed using in situ fabrication are employed to avoid fluid flow inside the cell observation chamber. Thus, the medium and chemoattractants are primarily provided by diffusion, maintaining cell-cell communication via secreted factors. Neutrophils were used to demonstrate the capability of the device for chemotaxis research. Experiments exhibited successful migration up a concentration gradient of interleukin 8.

Indexed as

ChemotaxisMicrofluidic Analytical TechniquesCell AggregationCell Culture TechniquesChemotaxis, LeukocyteDiffusionHumansMembranes, ArtificialNeutrophilsMembranes, Artificial

Identifiers

PMID19495465
PMCPMC2804468

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.