Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24488050›Full record

ReviewLab on a chip2014

The intersection of flow cytometry with microfluidics and microfabrication.

Menake E Piyasena, Steven W Graves

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Lab on a chip, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 57 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
57citing 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

57 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Flow cytometry and cell sorting.Frontiers in medicine · 2023
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

2 authors.

Menake E PiyasenaCenter for Biomedical Engineering, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA.
Steven W Graves

Funding

High volume high throughput affordable parallel acoustic flow cytometryR21GM107805 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO · PI GRAVES, STEVEN W · 2013 to 2015
$546k
A biomimetic nanoparticle protease assay platformR21EB016339 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO · PI GRAVES, STEVEN W · 2013 to 2014
$364k
NIBIB NIH HHS EB016339NIBIB NIH HHS R21 EB016339NIGMS NIH HHS GM107805NIGMS NIH HHS R21 GM107805
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A modern flow cytometer can analyze and sort particles on a one by one basis at rates of 50,000 particles per second. Flow cytometers can also measure as many as 17 channels of fluorescence, several angles of scattered light, and other non-optical parameters such as particle impedance. More specialized flow cytometers can provide even greater analysis power, such as single molecule detection, imaging, and full spectral collection, at reduced rates. These capabilities have made flow cytometers an invaluable tool for numerous applications including cellular immunophenotyping, CD4+ T-cell counting, multiplex microsphere analysis, high-throughput screening, and rare cell analysis and sorting. Many bio-analytical techniques have been influenced by the advent of microfluidics as a component in analytical tools and flow cytometry is no exception. Here we detail the functions and uses of a modern flow cytometer, review the recent and historical contributions of microfluidics and microfabricated devices to field of flow cytometry, examine current application areas, and suggest opportunities for the synergistic application of microfabrication approaches to modern flow cytometry.

Indexed as

Flow CytometryMicrofluidic Analytical TechniquesAnimalsCD4-Positive T-LymphocytesHumansImmunotherapyPortraits as Topic

Identifiers

PMID24488050
PMCPMC4077616

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.