Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25759750›Full record

ArticleBiomicrofluidics2015

Single-cell printing based on impedance detection.

J Schoendube, D Wright, R Zengerle, P Koltay

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biomicrofluidics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 56 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Droplet-based bioprinting.Nature reviews. Methods primers · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Label-Free Metabolic Classification of Single Cells in Droplets Using the Phasor Approach to Fluorescence Lifetime Imaging Microscopy.Cytometry. Part A : the journal of the International Society for Analytical Cytology · 2019
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

J Schoendube
D WrightZurich Instruments AG , Technoparkstrasse 1, 8005 Zurich, Switzerland.
R Zengerle
P Koltay
University of Freiburg · DEBioFluidix (Germany) · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Label-free isolation of single cells is essential for the growing field of single-cell analysis. Here, we present a device which prints single living cells encapsulated in free-flying picoliter droplets. It combines inkjet printing and impedance flow cytometry. Droplet volume can be controlled in the range of 500 pl-800 pl by piezo actuator displacement. Two sets of parallel facing electrodes in a 50 μm × 55 μm channel are applied to measure the presence and velocity of a single cell in real-time. Polystyrene beads with <5% variation in diameter generated signal variations of 12%-17% coefficients of variation. Single bead efficiency (i.e., printing events with single beads vs. total number of printing events) was 73% ± 11% at a throughput of approximately 9 events/min. Viability of printed HeLa cells and human primary fibroblasts was demonstrated by culturing cells for at least eight days.

Identifiers

PMID25759750
PMCPMC4327922
OpenAlexW2044549466

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.