ArticleLab on a chip2010
Image-based feedback control for real-time sorting of microspheres in a microfluidic device.
Article in Lab on a chip, 2010. 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.
- Automatic feedback control by image processing for mixing solutions in a microfluidic device.Biomicrofluidics · 2022Article
- Controlling inertial focussing using rotational motion.The European physical journal. E, Soft matter · 2014Article
- Integrated microfluidic chip for rapid DNA digestion and time-resolved capillary electrophoresis analysis.Biomicrofluidics · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We describe a control system to automatically distribute antibody-functionalized beads to addressable assay chambers within a PDMS microfluidic device. The system used real-time image acquisition and processing to manage the valve states required to sort beads with unit precision. The image processing component of the control system correctly counted the number of beads in 99.81% of images (2689 of 2694), with only four instances of an incorrect number of beads being sorted to an assay chamber, and one instance of inaccurately counted beads being improperly delivered to waste. Post-experimental refinement of the counting script resulted in one counting error in 2694 images of beads (99.96% accuracy). We analyzed a range of operational variables (flow pressure, bead concentration, etc.) using a statistical model to characterize those that yielded optimal sorting speed and efficiency. The integrated device was able to capture, count, and deliver beads at a rate of approximately four per minute so that bead arrays could be assembled in 32 individually addressable assay chambers for eight analytical measurements in duplicate (512 beads total) within 2.5 hours. This functionality demonstrates the successful integration of a robust control system with precision bead handling that is the enabling technology for future development of a highly multiplexed bead-based analytical device.
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.