Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20023742›Full record

ReviewIntegrative biology : quantitative biosciences from nano to macro2009

Microparticle encoding technologies for high-throughput multiplexed suspension assays.

Sam Birtwell, Hywel Morgan

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Integrative biology : quantitative biosciences from nano to macro, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing 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

33 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Paramagnetic encoding of molecules.Nature communications · 2022
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Hydrogel microparticles for biosensing.European polymer journal · 2015
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

2 authors.

Sam BirtwellSchool of Electronics and Computer Science, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK. s.birtwell@soton.ac.uk
Hywel Morgan

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The requirement for analysis of large numbers of biomolecules for drug discovery and clinical diagnostics has driven the development of low-cost, flexible and high-throughput methods for simultaneous detection of multiple molecular targets in a single sample (multiplexed analysis). The technique that seems most likely to satisfy all of these requirements is the multiplexed suspension (bead-based) assay, which offers a number of advantages over alternative approaches such as ELISAs and microarrays. In a bead based assay, different probe molecules are attached to different beads (of a few tens of microns in size), which are then reacted in suspension with the target sample. After reaction, the beads must be identifiable in order to determine the attached probe molecule, and thus each bead must be labelled (encoded) with a unique identifier. A large number of techniques have been proposed for encoding beads. This critical review analyses each technology on the basis of its ability to fulfil the practical requirements of assays, whilst being compatible with low-cost, high-throughput manufacturing processes and high-throughput detection methods. As a result, we identify the most likely candidates to be used for future integrated device development for practical applications.

Indexed as

MicrospheresMolecular Probe TechniquesBiological AssayBiotechnologyStaining and LabelingSuspensionsSuspensions

Identifiers

PMID20023742
PMCPMC7108550

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.