ArticlePloS one2017
A novel device for collecting and dispensing fingerstick blood for point of care testing.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- More than a drop of blood: the paradigm shift of a large-volume capillary sample for point-of-care clinical diagnostics.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2026Review
- Promise and perils of paper-based point-of-care nucleic acid detection for endemic and pandemic pathogens.Lab on a chip · 2023Review
- Point-of-care diagnostics: recent developments in a pandemic age.Lab on a chip · 2021Review
- SNAPflex: a paper-and-plastic device for instrument-free RNA and DNA extraction from whole blood.Lab on a chip · 2020Article
- Dynamic and tunable metabolite control for robust minimal-equipment assessment of serum zinc.Nature communications · 2019Article
- Engineering Precision Medicine.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2019Review
- From Point-of-Care Testing to eHealth Diagnostic Devices (eDiagnostics).ACS central science · 2018Review
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 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The increased world-wide availability of point-of-care (POC) tests utilizing fingerstick blood has led to testing scenarios in which multiple separate fingersticks are performed during a single patient encounter, generating cumulative discomfort and reducing testing efficiency. We have developed a device capable of a) collection of up to 100 μL of fingerstick blood from a single fingerstick by capillary action, and b) dispensing this blood in variable increments set by the user. We tested the prototype device both in a controlled laboratory setting and in a fingerstick study involving naive device users, and found it to have accuracy and precision similar to a conventional pipettor. The users also found the device to be easy to use, and recommended minor ergonomic improvements. Our device would allow performance of multiple POC tests from a single fingerstick blood sample, thus providing a novel functionality that may be of use in many testing settings worldwide.
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.