Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21926981›Full record

ReviewNature nanotechnology2011

Nanopore sensors for nucleic acid analysis.

Bala Murali Venkatesan, Rashid Bashir

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature nanotechnology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 318 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
318citing papers in PubMed
74.1field-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

318 citing papers in PubMed, 1,299 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Detecting DNA translocation through a nanopore using a van der Waals heterojunction diode.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

258 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Bala Murali VenkatesanDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois 61820, USA.
Rashid Bashir
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign · US

Funding

Training the Next Generation of Researchers in Cancer Nanotechnology at the NCI MR25CA154015 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN · PI BASHIR, RASHID, NARDULLI, ANN · 2010 to 2014
$1.5M
DNA Methylation Analysis Using Solid-State Nanopore Sensors - A Pathway to EarlyR21CA155863 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN · PI BASHIR, RASHID · 2011 to 2012
$355k
NCI NIH HHS R21 CA155863NCI NIH HHS R25 CA154015
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nanopore analysis is an emerging technique that involves using a voltage to drive molecules through a nanoscale pore in a membrane between two electrolytes, and monitoring how the ionic current through the nanopore changes as single molecules pass through it. This approach allows charged polymers (including single-stranded DNA, double-stranded DNA and RNA) to be analysed with subnanometre resolution and without the need for labels or amplification. Recent advances suggest that nanopore-based sensors could be competitive with other third-generation DNA sequencing technologies, and may be able to rapidly and reliably sequence the human genome for under $1,000. In this article we review the use of nanopore technology in DNA sequencing, genetics and medical diagnostics.

Indexed as

Genome, HumanNanoporesAnimalsBiosensing TechniquesDNA, Single-StrandedHumansRNASequence Analysis, DNADNA, Single-StrandedRNA

Identifiers

PMID21926981
OpenAlexW2148332776

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.