A microchip electrophoresis-based fluorescence signal amplification strategy for highly sensitive detection of biomolecules.

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, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

1. Biosensing bacterial 16S rDNA by microchip electrophoresis combined with a CRISPR system based on real-time crRNA/Cas12a formation.RSC advances · 2022
   Article
2. Recent Advances in Aptasensor for Cytokine Detection: A Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
   Review
3. Microfluidic electrophoretic non-enzymatic kanamycin assay making use of a stirring bar functionalized with gold-labeled aptamer, of a fluorescent DNA probe, and of signal amplification via hybridization chain reaction.Mikrochimica acta · 2018
   Article

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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Funding

Abstract

Indexed as